Breve Análise do Smartphone Samsung Galaxy Fold 5G: Um telefone dobrável com um ar de confiança
Device comparison
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Drive | Size | Resolution | Price |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
86.4 % v7 (old) | 10/2019 | Samsung Galaxy Fold SD 855, Adreno 640 | 276 g | 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash | 7.30" | 2152x1536 | |
87.1 % v7 (old) | 09/2019 | Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU | 226 g | 64 GB SSD | 6.50" | 2688x1242 | |
84.5 % v7 (old) | 01/2019 | Huawei Mate 20 X Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10 | 232 g | 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 7.20" | 2244x1080 | |
87.4 % v7 (old) | 04/2019 | Samsung Galaxy S10 5G Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12 | 198 g | 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 6.70" | 3040x1440 | |
85.1 % v7 (old) | 07/2019 | ZTE Axon 10 Pro SD 855, Adreno 640 | 178 g | 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 6.47" | 2340x1080 |
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 | |
Huawei Mate 20 X | |
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max | |
Samsung Galaxy Fold | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G | |
ZTE Axon 10 Pro | |
iperf3 receive AX12 | |
Samsung Galaxy Fold | |
ZTE Axon 10 Pro | |
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G | |
Huawei Mate 20 X |
|
iluminação: 97 %
iluminação com acumulador: 531 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Preto: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.3 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 1.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
99.6% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.15
Samsung Galaxy Fold Infinity Flex-Display (Dynamic AMOLED, 7,3") und Super AMOLED (4,6"), 2152x1536, 7.3" | Samsung Galaxy S10 5G OLED, 3040x1440, 6.7" | Samsung Galaxy Note10+ Dynamic AMOLED, 3040x1440, 6.8" | Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max OLED, 2688x1242, 6.5" | Huawei Mate 20 X OLED, 2244x1080, 7.2" | ZTE Axon 10 Pro AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.5" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | -31% | -8% | 20% | 10% | -59% | |
Brightness middle | 531 | 735 38% | 683 29% | 790 49% | 421 -21% | 402 -24% |
Brightness | 532 | 735 38% | 694 30% | 790 48% | 418 -21% | 399 -25% |
Brightness Distribution | 97 | 94 -3% | 96 -1% | 97 0% | 96 -1% | 92 -5% |
Black Level * | ||||||
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 2.3 | 3.9 -70% | 2.9 -26% | 1.4 39% | 1.1 52% | 4.1 -78% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 3.7 | 10.9 -195% | 4.8 -30% | 3.4 8% | 2.2 41% | 6.5 -76% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.5 | 1.4 7% | 2.2 -47% | 1.9 -27% | 1.4 7% | 3.7 -147% |
Gamma | 2.15 102% | 2.09 105% | 2.11 104% | 2.23 99% | 2.23 99% | 2.23 99% |
CCT | 6631 98% | 6549 99% | 6247 104% | 6466 101% | 6723 97% | 7841 83% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 240.4 Hz | ≤ 99 % brightness setting | |
The display backlight flickers at 240.4 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 99 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. 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. |
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
5.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 2.8 ms rise | |
↘ 2.8 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. » 14 % 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 | ||
8.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 4 ms rise | |
↘ 4.4 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. » 18 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). |
PCMark for Android | |
Work performance score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy Fold | |
Huawei Mate 20 X | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G | |
ZTE Axon 10 Pro | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (10330 - 14439, n=19) | |
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy Fold | |
Huawei Mate 20 X | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G | |
ZTE Axon 10 Pro | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (8342 - 11440, n=19) |
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy Fold | |
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max | |
Huawei Mate 20 X | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G | |
ZTE Axon 10 Pro | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (217967 - 398720, n=16) |
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy Fold | |
Huawei Mate 20 X | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G | |
ZTE Axon 10 Pro | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (239512 - 268271, n=12) |
Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max (Safari Mobile 13.1) | |
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=164, last 2 years) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (45.5 - 67, n=16) | |
Samsung Galaxy Fold (Samung Browser 10.1) | |
ZTE Axon 10 Pro (Chrome 74) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G (Samung Browser 9.2) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ (Samung Browser 9.2) |
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max (Safari Mobile 13.1) | |
ZTE Axon 10 Pro (Chrome 74) | |
Samsung Galaxy Fold (Samsung Browser 10.1) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (84.4 - 120, n=17) | |
Huawei Mate 20 X (hrome 71) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G (Samsung Browser 9.2) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ (Samsung Browser 9.2) |
Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max (Safari Mobile 13.1) | |
Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=150, last 2 years) | |
ZTE Axon 10 Pro (Chrome 74) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (42.5 - 67.9, n=15) | |
Samsung Galaxy Fold (Samsung Browser 10.1) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G (Samsung Browser 9.2) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ (Samsung Browser 9.2) |
WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max (Safari Mobile 13.1) | |
Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy Fold (Samsung Browser 10.1) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ (Samsung Browser 9.2) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (90 - 129, n=20) | |
ZTE Axon 10 Pro (Chrome 74) | |
Huawei Mate 20 X (hrome 71) |
Octane V2 - Total Score | |
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max (Safari Mobile 13.1) | |
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=205, last 2 years) | |
ZTE Axon 10 Pro (Chrome 74) | |
Samsung Galaxy Fold (Samsung Browser 10.1) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (17011 - 33918, n=21) | |
Huawei Mate 20 X (hrome 71) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G (Samsung Browser 9.2) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ (Samsung Browser 9.2) |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ (Samsung Browser 9.2) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (1852 - 2611, n=19) | |
Huawei Mate 20 X (hrome 71) | |
Samsung Galaxy Fold (Samsung Browser 10.1) | |
ZTE Axon 10 Pro (Chrome 74) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G (Samsung Browser 9.2) | |
Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=163, last 2 years) | |
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max (Safari Mobile 13.1) |
* ... smaller is better
Samsung Galaxy Fold | Huawei Mate 20 X | Samsung Galaxy S10 5G | ZTE Axon 10 Pro | Samsung Galaxy Note10+ | OnePlus 7 Pro | Average 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AndroBench 3-5 | 124% | -30% | 108% | 131% | -2% | 142% | 296% | |
Sequential Read 256KB | 1303 | 912 -30% | 816 -37% | 769 -41% | 1504 15% | 1468 13% | 1593 ? 22% | 1863 ? 43% |
Sequential Write 256KB | 394.5 | 182.7 -54% | 246.3 -38% | 503 28% | 588 49% | 387 -2% | 565 ? 43% | 1446 ? 267% |
Random Read 4KB | 158.4 | 144.4 -9% | 135 -15% | 150.4 -5% | 196.2 24% | 174.1 10% | 211 ? 33% | 278 ? 76% |
Random Write 4KB | 34.41 | 237.6 590% | 23.79 -31% | 189.5 451% | 183.6 434% | 24.8 -28% | 196.5 ? 471% | 309 ? 798% |
PUBG Mobile
Battle Bay
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 36.6 °C / 98 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 35.1 °C / 95 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25.7 °C / 78 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Samsung Galaxy Fold audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.8% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 6% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 89% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 26% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 68% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.7% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 8.8% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 23% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 69% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 44% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 49% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
desligado | 0.01 / 0.19 Watt |
Ocioso | 0.6 / 0.85 / 1 Watt |
Carga |
4.47 / 9.02 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Samsung Galaxy Fold 4235 mAh | Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max 3969 mAh | Huawei Mate 20 X 5000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S10 5G 4500 mAh | ZTE Axon 10 Pro 4000 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -88% | -50% | -51% | -10% | -43% | -47% | |
Idle Minimum * | 0.6 | 0.92 -53% | 0.79 -32% | 0.66 -10% | 0.76 -27% | 0.939 ? -57% | 0.885 ? -48% |
Idle Average * | 0.85 | 2.9 -241% | 1.72 -102% | 1.82 -114% | 1.15 -35% | 1.506 ? -77% | 1.451 ? -71% |
Idle Maximum * | 1 | 2.94 -194% | 1.83 -83% | 1.83 -83% | 1.18 -18% | 1.799 ? -80% | 1.608 ? -61% |
Load Average * | 4.47 | 3.65 18% | 5.53 -24% | 6.11 -37% | 3.95 12% | 4.61 ? -3% | 6.55 ? -47% |
Load Maximum * | 9.02 | 6.18 31% | 9.85 -9% | 9.81 -9% | 7.49 17% | 9.04 ? -0% | 9.92 ? -10% |
* ... smaller is better
Samsung Galaxy Fold 4235 mAh | Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max 3969 mAh | Huawei Mate 20 X 5000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S10 5G 4500 mAh | ZTE Axon 10 Pro 4000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Note10+ 4300 mAh | OnePlus 7 Pro 4000 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | 41% | 9% | 8% | -1% | -8% | -5% | |
Reader / Idle | 1724 | 2618 52% | 1984 15% | 2340 36% | 1927 12% | 1585 -8% | 1745 1% |
H.264 | 1027 | 1346 31% | 986 -4% | 1047 2% | 1068 4% | 934 -9% | 802 -22% |
WiFi v1.3 | 600 | 909 52% | 786 31% | 533 -11% | 680 13% | 532 -11% | 768 28% |
Load | 316 | 408 29% | 300 -5% | 327 3% | 217 -31% | 305 -3% | 236 -25% |
Pro
Contra
Verdict - Delicate and innovative
Finalmente chegou, o primeiro smartphone dobrável a chegar aos nossos escritórios e à Europa. Sem dúvida, o Galaxy Fold é um produto inovador, com sua tela dobrável oferecendo uma pequena janela para o futuro. Se o design que a Samsung adotou é ideal ou não continua a ser uma questão de gosto. O Huawei Mate X parece ótimo, mas se seu painel é tão sensível quanto o do Galaxy Fold, questionaríamos o quão durável e prático é.
Talvez sem surpresa, a tela principal é uma das maiores deficiências do Galaxy Fold. A tela dobrável permanece vulnerável apesar de ser reforçada, portanto, não espere que o Galaxy Fold seja resistente nem certificado com MIL-STD ou IP. Mesmo pressionando demais ou batendo com as unhas pode causar impressões profundas na tela, o que pode ser um problema para crianças ou pessoas com unhas artificiais. A Samsung não cobre necessariamente os danos causados dessa maneira, mesmo com o Care+, que é algo que vale a pena lembrar antes de comprar o Galaxy Fold. Também não queremos falar sobre reparos de acompanhamento após o primeiro ano.
Dobrável, ótimos acessórios e muitos superlativos. O Samsung Galaxy Fold é uma forte peça de tecnologia, mas talvez seja apenas para quem tem um toque sensível.
O software, que até agora só foi adaptado para esse formato, também diminui o prazer de usar o Galaxy Fold. No entanto, o Galaxy Fold é um dos primeiros smartphones do gênero, então podemos ignorar suas deficiências baseadas em software por enquanto. No geral, o Galaxy Fold é um smartphone excelente e bem conectado. Portanto, se você tiver dinheiro suficiente para gastar e adora estes smartphones, vale a pena considerar o Samsung Galaxy Fold.
Samsung Galaxy Fold
- 08/31/2022 v7 (old)
Daniel Schmidt