Breve Análise do Smartphone Samsung Galaxy A5 (2016)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 (Galaxy Serie)
Processador
Samsung Exynos 7580 Octa 8 x 1.6 GHz, Cortex-A53
Placa gráfica
ARM Mali-T720 MP2
Memória
2048 MB
Pantalha
5.20 polegadas 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel, capacitiva, Super AMOLED, Brilhante: sim
Disco rígido
16 GB eMMC Flash, 16 GB
, 10.8 GB livre
peso
155 g, Suprimento de energia: 63 g
Preço
430 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 397 cd/m² (Nits) Médio: 379.7 cd/m² Minimum: 1.79 cd/m²iluminação: 91 %
iluminação com acumulador: 378 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Preto: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.95 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
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
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 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 (20.9 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 (32.8 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 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 8705 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Geekbench 3 | AnTuTu v5 | AnTuTu v6 | 3DMark | GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | GFXBench 3.0 | BaseMark OS II
| 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 average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 33.3 °C / 92 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 35.9 °C / 97 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 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.
(+) 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 63.7 °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
Consumo de energia
| 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
+ Excelente tela
+ Construção muito boa
+ Duração da bateria muito longa
+ Baixas emissões
+ Armazenamento expansível mediante micro-SD
+ Leitor de digitais
Contra
- Desempenho médio
- Bateria não removível
- Lado traseiro liso
- PWM flickering
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
Smartphone - Médio equilibrado
Price comparison
