Breve Análise do Smartphone Samsung Galaxy J3 (2016) Duos

Name: Samsung Galaxy J3 2016
Brand: Samsung

Duos dinâmico? A Samsung oferece um acessível smartphone de 5 polegadas com o seu Galaxy J3. Ele ainda oferece suas virtudes tradicionais, como um slot micro-SD integrado e bateria removível. Mas será isso suficiente para sobreviver no setor de baixo custo, altamente competitivo?

Andreas Kilian, ✓ Tanja Hinum (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), Published 06/29/2016 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

Android ARM Smartphone Touchscreen

Test device courtesy of notebooksbilliger.de

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Samsung Galaxy J3 2016 (Galaxy J7 Serie)

Processador

Spreadtrum SC9830A 4 x 1.5 GHz, Cortex-A7

Placa gráfica

ARM Mali-400 MP2

Memória

1536 MB

Pantalha

5.00 polegadas 16:9, 1280 x 720 pixel 294 PPI, tela táctil capacitiva, Super AMOLED, Brilhante: sim

Disco rígido

8 GB eMMC Flash, 8 GB

, 4.35 GB livre

Conexões

1 USB 2.0, Conexões Audio: Conector para fones de 3,5 mm, Card Reader: micro-SD máx. 128 GB, Sensores: acelerômetro, sensor de proximidade, giroscópio, WiFi Direct, MirrorLink, USB-OTG, 2x Micro-SIM

Funcionamento em rede

Broadcom 802.11ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 4.0, GSM quad-band (850/900/1800/1900 MHz), 3G quad-band (850/900/1900/2100), LTE (B1/B3/B5/B7/B8/B20), SAR body: 0.425 W/Kg, SAR head: 0,477 W/Kg, Dual SIM, LTE, GPS

Tamanho

altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 7.9 x 142.3 x 71

Bateria

9.88 Wh, 2600 mAh Lítio-Ion, removeable, Tempo de conversação 3G (de acordo com o fabricante): 13 h

Sistema Operativo

Android 5.1 Lollipop

Camera

Primary Camera: 8 MPix (auto foco f/2.2, vídeos 720p @30 FPS)
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix (foco fixo f/2.2, vídeo 720p @ 30 FPS)

Características adicionais

Alto falantes: Alto falante mono traseiro, Teclado: virtual, Fonte de alimentação, cabo USB, headset in-ear, Microsoft Office, Galaxy Apps, MyGalaxy, Smart Manager, 24 Meses Garantia, fanless

peso

138 g, Suprimento de energia: 46 g

Preço

189 EUR

Links

Samsung página inicial
Samsung Seção de notebook

Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

see all specifications

Samsung Galaxy J3 (2016) - turning point

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

Samsung Galaxy J3 (2016)

Huawei P9

iPhone 6S Plus

Canon EOS 70D (Referenz)

click to load images

Samsung Galaxy J3 (2016)

Huawei P9

iPhone 6S Plus

Canon EOS 70D (Referenz)

click to load images

Samsung Galaxy J3 (2016)

Huawei P9

iPhone 6S Plus

Canon EOS 70D (Referenz)


305 cd/m²	297 cd/m²	296 cd/m²
306 cd/m²	295 cd/m²	296 cd/m²
304 cd/m²	294 cd/m²	296 cd/m²

Distribuição do brilho

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2

Máximo: 306 cd/m² (Nits) Médio: 298.8 cd/m² Minimum: 4.1 cd/m²
iluminação: 96 %
iluminação com acumulador: 295 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Preto: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.8 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.93
ΔE Greyscale 4.8 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 1.84

	Samsung Galaxy J3 2016 Super AMOLED, 1280x720, 5"	Samsung Galaxy J5 Super AMOLED, 1280x720, 5"	Huawei P8 lite IPS, 1280x720, 5"	ZTE Blade V6 IPS, 1280x720, 5"	Coolpad Porto S IPS, 1280x720, 5"	Microsoft Lumia 650 OLED, 1280x720, 5"
Screen
Brightness middle	295	349 18%	365 24%	336 14%	407 38%	349 18%
Brightness	299	353 18%	353 18%	315 5%	403 35%	353 18%
Brightness Distribution	96	93 -3%	93 -3%	81 -16%	92 -4%	92 -4%
Black Level *			0.42	0.39	0.5
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	5.8	5.22 10%	5.2 10%	8.29 -43%	7.9 -36%	2.6 55%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	8.6				18.2 -112%	8.2 5%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	4.8	3.96 17%	5.85 -22%	8.57 -79%	8.9 -85%	1.8 62%
Gamma	1.84 ^120%	2.08 ^106%	2.17 ^101%	1.96 ^112%	2.46 ^89%	2.06 ^107%
CCT	6252 ^104%	7308 ^89%	7252 ^90%	8172 ^80%	8332 ^78%	6542 ^99%
Contrast			869	862	814
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)			70.86
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)			91.25	89.7

* ... 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 detected

238.1 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 238.1 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 238.1 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.

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
20 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 10 ms rise
20 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 10 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. » 39 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (21 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
20 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 10 ms rise
20 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 10 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 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 29 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms).

PCMark for Android - Work performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	3350 Points
Samsung Galaxy J5	3966 Points +18%
Huawei P8 lite	3717 Points +11%
Coolpad Porto S	2893 Points -14%

AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	24748 Points
Coolpad Porto S	25415 Points +3%
Microsoft Lumia 650	31844 Points +29%

Geekbench 3
32 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	1280 Points
ZTE Blade V6	1807 Points +41%
Coolpad Porto S	1343 Points +5%
32 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	405 Points
ZTE Blade V6	626 Points +55%
Coolpad Porto S	470 Points +16%

BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	569 Points
Samsung Galaxy J5	615 Points +8%
Huawei P8 lite	616 Points +8%
ZTE Blade V6	699 Points +23%
Coolpad Porto S	599 Points +5%
Microsoft Lumia 650	546 Points -4%
Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	158 Points
Samsung Galaxy J5	314 Points +99%
Huawei P8 lite	303 Points +92%
ZTE Blade V6	287 Points +82%
Coolpad Porto S	173 Points +9%
Microsoft Lumia 650	207 Points +31%
System (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	1134 Points
Samsung Galaxy J5	1058 Points -7%
Huawei P8 lite	1467 Points +29%
ZTE Blade V6	1200 Points +6%
Coolpad Porto S	905 Points -20%
Microsoft Lumia 650	552 Points -51%
Overall (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	423 Points
Samsung Galaxy J5	534 Points +26%
Huawei P8 lite	687 Points +62%
ZTE Blade V6	687 Points +62%
Coolpad Porto S	458 Points +8%
Microsoft Lumia 650	435 Points +3%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	7.6 fps
Huawei P8 lite	15.3 fps +101%
ZTE Blade V6	15 fps +97%
Coolpad Porto S	4.8 fps -37%
Microsoft Lumia 650	5.67 fps -25%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	4.6 fps
Huawei P8 lite	9.9 fps +115%
ZTE Blade V6	8.5 fps +85%
Coolpad Porto S	8.6 fps +87%
Microsoft Lumia 650	3.25 fps -29%

3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	3535 Points
Samsung Galaxy J5	4345 Points +23%
Huawei P8 lite	5629 Points +59%
ZTE Blade V6	5013 Points +42%
Coolpad Porto S	3028 Points -14%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	3037 Points
Samsung Galaxy J5	3782 Points +25%
Huawei P8 lite	5167 Points +70%
ZTE Blade V6	4415 Points +45%
Coolpad Porto S	2590 Points -15%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	8322 Points
Samsung Galaxy J5	9079 Points +9%
Huawei P8 lite	8206 Points -1%
ZTE Blade V6	9542 Points +15%
Coolpad Porto S	7413 Points -11%
1280x720 Ice Storm Standard Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	3938 Points
Samsung Galaxy J5	5227 Points +33%
Huawei P8 lite	6010 Points +53%
ZTE Blade V6	6116 Points +55%
1280x720 Ice Storm Standard Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	3453 Points
Samsung Galaxy J5	4692 Points +36%
Huawei P8 lite	5732 Points +66%
ZTE Blade V6	5677 Points +64%
1280x720 Ice Storm Standard Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	7751 Points
Samsung Galaxy J5	8697 Points +12%
Huawei P8 lite	7238 Points -7%
ZTE Blade V6	8390 Points +8%

Legend

Samsung Galaxy J3 2016 Spreadtrum SC9830A, ARM Mali-400 MP2, 8 GB eMMC Flash

Samsung Galaxy J5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 410 MSM8916, Qualcomm Adreno 306, 8 GB eMMC Flash

Huawei P8 lite HiSilicon Kirin 620, ARM Mali-450 MP4, 16 GB eMMC Flash

ZTE Blade V6 Mediatek MT6735, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Coolpad Porto S Mediatek MT6735, ARM Mali-T720, 8 GB eMMC Flash

Microsoft Lumia 650 Qualcomm Snapdragon 212 APQ8009, Qualcomm Adreno 304, 16 GB eMMC Flash

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

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	16.2 Points
Samsung Galaxy J5	18.42 Points +14%
Coolpad Porto S	14.17 Points -13%

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	13702 ms *
Samsung Galaxy J5	14074 ms * -3%
Huawei P8 lite	15866 ms * -16%
ZTE Blade V6	25141 ms * -83%
Coolpad Porto S	32901 ms * -140%
Microsoft Lumia 650	18237 ms * -33%

Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	2842 Points
Samsung Galaxy J5	3038 Points +7%
Huawei P8 lite	2483 Points -13%
ZTE Blade V6	2978 Points +5%
Coolpad Porto S	2088 Points -27%
Microsoft Lumia 650	2574 Points -9%

WebXPRT 2015 - Overall (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	39 Points
Samsung Galaxy J5	52 Points +33%
Huawei P8 lite	47 Points +21%
Microsoft Lumia 650	52 Points +33%

* ... smaller is better

AndroBench 3-5 | BaseMark OS II

AndroBench 3-5
Random Write 4KB (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	9.43 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy J5	7.2 MB/s -24%
Huawei P8 lite	8.32 MB/s -12%
ZTE Blade V6	3.66 MB/s -61%
Coolpad Porto S	13.95 MB/s +48%
Random Read 4KB (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	16.82 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy J5	19.25 MB/s +14%
Huawei P8 lite	18.46 MB/s +10%
ZTE Blade V6	27.08 MB/s +61%
Coolpad Porto S	22.52 MB/s +34%
Sequential Write 256KB (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	41.4 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy J5	39.4 MB/s -5%
Huawei P8 lite	52.8 MB/s +28%
ZTE Blade V6	37.37 MB/s -10%
Coolpad Porto S	39.99 MB/s -3%
Sequential Read 256KB (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	64.4 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy J5	145.5 MB/s +126%
Huawei P8 lite	139.5 MB/s +117%
ZTE Blade V6	269.3 MB/s +318%
Coolpad Porto S	168.2 MB/s +161%

BaseMark OS II - Memory (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy J3 2016	315 Points
Samsung Galaxy J5	399 Points +27%
Huawei P8 lite	816 Points +159%
ZTE Blade V6	922 Points +193%
Coolpad Porto S	467 Points +48%
Microsoft Lumia 650	575 Points +83%

Real Racing 3
	Configurações	Valor
	high	22 fps
	low	54 fps

Asphalt 8: Airborne
	Configurações	Valor
	high	15 fps
	very low	27 fps

Carga Máxima

Inatividade


33.9 °C	33.7 °C	32.5 °C
33.8 °C	33.6 °C	32.5 °C
33.1 °C	33.4 °C	32.2 °C

Máximo: 33.9 °C
Médio: 33.2 °C


31 °C	32.9 °C	35 °C
31.3 °C	32.6 °C	34.1 °C
29.1 °C	32.9 °C	32.8 °C

Máximo: 35 °C
Médio: 32.4 °C

alimentação elétrica 31.2 °C | Temperatura do quarto 21.9 °C | Voltcraft IR-260

(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 33.2 °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 33.9 °C / 93 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 35 °C / 95 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 33.1 °C / 92 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.

Consumo de energia

desligado	0.03 / 0.39 Watt
Ocioso	0.96 / 1.14 / 1.23 Watt
Carga	2.45 / 2.92 Watt


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

	Samsung Galaxy J3 2016 2.600 mAh	Samsung Galaxy J5 2.600 mAh	Huawei P8 lite 2.200 mAh	ZTE Blade V6 2.200 mAh	Coolpad Porto S 2.000 mAh	Microsoft Lumia 650 2.000 mAh
Power Consumption		-70%	-83%	-59%	-54%	-14%
Idle Minimum *	0.96	1.5 -56%	1.4 -46%	1.2 -25%	1.16 -21%	0.7 27%
Idle Average *	1.14	2.2 -93%	2.3 -102%	1.8 -58%	2.21 -94%	1.1 4%
Idle Maximum *	1.23	2.4 -95%	2.5 -103%	2.1 -71%	2.24 -82%	1.18 4%
Load Average *	2.45	3.5 -43%	3.9 -59%	4.1 -67%	3.34 -36%	4.04 -65%
Load Maximum *	2.92	4.8 -64%	6 -105%	5.1 -75%	3.95 -35%	4.07 -39%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria

Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)		20h 12min
WiFi Websurfing (Chrome 50)		8h 22min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p		9h 50min
Carga (máximo brilho)		7h 13min

	Samsung Galaxy J3 2016 2.600 mAh	Samsung Galaxy J5 2.600 mAh	Huawei P8 lite 2.200 mAh	ZTE Blade V6 2.200 mAh	Coolpad Porto S 2.000 mAh	Microsoft Lumia 650 2.000 mAh
Battery Runtime		-1%	-41%	-32%	0%	-30%
Reader / Idle	1212	1292 7%	715 -41%			910 -25%
H.264	590	657 11%	369 -37%	424 -28%		510 -14%
WiFi v1.3	502	495 -1%	351 -30%	400 -20%	504 0%	345 -31%
Load	433	350 -19%	194 -55%	230 -47%		213 -51%

Pro

+ Carcaça bem construída

+ Slot Micro-SD

+ App2SD e USB OTG

+ Dual-SIM ou slot microSD

+ Boa tela

+ Tela táctil precisa

+ Longa duração da bateria

+ Bateria removível

+ Suporte para LTE

Contra

- Sem sensor de luz

- Sem LED de notificações

- Qualidade média da câmera principal

- Apenas Android 5.1.1

- Módulo GPS com sinal instável

- Microfone silencioso no modo mãos livres

- WiFi somente na banda 2,4 GHz

- Sem suporte para Miracast ou MHL

- Afogamento no teste de estresse

In review: Samsung Galaxy J3 (2016) - SM-J320F/DS. Review sample courtesy of Notebooksbilliger.de

O Galaxy J3 (SM-J320F/DS) parece ser uma versão lite do Galaxy J5 do ano passado que recentemente foi substituído pelo seu similar sucessor, o Galaxy J5 (2016) . A herança do modelo irmão é evidente no bom painel AMOLED e o design muito similar. O último, ainda permite que o usuário substitua facilmente a bateria. Além disso, o handset ganha pontos com uma carcaça rígida e bem construída, embora seja feita de plástico. Outras virtudes são a tela táctil precisa e a longa duração da bateria. O fato de que dois cartões SIM e um cartão micro-SD possam ser inseridos no aparelho, ao mesmo tempo, é algo favorável.

Foi necessário fazer concessões no equipamento da câmera. O modelo de teste oferece apenas um sensor de 8-megapixels na parte traseira, que tira fotos aceitavelmente boas somente com boas condições de iluminação. Também, apenas 4,35 GB de armazenamento é utilizável no estado de entrega, e isso irá se esgotar rapidamente. Afortunadamente, o Galaxy J3 suporta USB OTG e os aplicativos também podem ser movidos para o cartão de memória, assim este problema pode ser contornado em certo grau. Embora o SoC Spreadtrum instalado, regularmente terminou em último lugar em nossos benchmarks, esta desvantagem dificilmente será notada no uso rotineiro: O modelo de teste surpreende com uma operação quase livre de lags.

Samsung criou um smartphone de nível de entrada solidário, com o Galaxy J3 (2016), que oferece muitos pontos positivos, apesar de seu preço moderado. O comprador terá que aceitar recortes notórios em termos de armazenamento integrado e a qualidade média das fotos da câmera principal.

Além disso o Samsung Galaxy J5, muito similar que é um modelo descontinuado, os rivais mencionados na comparação são alternativas dignas para o modelo de teste. No entanto, o comprador terá que aceitar durações de bateria mais curtas, mas encontrará modelos com carcaças de metal, como no (ZTE Blade V6) ou melhor desempenho (Huawei P8 lite entre outros) a um preço similar.

Esta é uma versão reduzida da análise original. Você pode ler a análise completa em inglês aqui.

Samsung Galaxy J3 2016 - 2016-06-17 06/17/2016 v5.1 ^(old)
Andreas Kilian

Acabamento

84%

Teclado

66 / 75 → 88%

Mouse

91%

Conectividade

40 / 60 → 66%

Peso

93%

Bateria

91%

Pantalha

82%

Desempenho do jogos

5 / 63 → 8%

Desempenho da aplicação

25 / 70 → 36%

Temperatura

91%

Ruído

100%

Audio

50 / 91 → 55%

Camera

61%

Médio

68%

81%

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 Samsung Galaxy J3 (2016) Duos

Andreas Kilian, 2016-06-29 (Update: 2016-07- 2)