Breve Análise do Smartphone Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite - Versão mais barata do phablet de caneta
Comparison Devices
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Drive | Size | Resolution | Price |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
82.8 % v7 (old) | 02/2020 | Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18 | 199 g | 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 6.70" | 2400x1080 | |
86.3 % v7 (old) | 08/2019 | Samsung Galaxy Note10 Exynos 9825, Mali-G76 MP12 | 168 g | 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash | 6.30" | 2280x1080 | |
89 % v7 (old) | 12/2019 | Huawei Mate 30 Pro Kirin 990, Mali-G76 MP16 | 198 g | 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash | 6.53" | 2400x1176 | |
86.5 % v7 (old) | 09/2019 | Apple iPhone 11 A13 Bionic, A13 Bionic GPU | 194 g | 64 GB SSD | 6.10" | 1792x828 | |
83.3 % v7 (old) | 12/2019 | Xiaomi Mi Note 10 SD 730G, Adreno 618 | 208 g | 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash | 6.47" | 2340x1080 | |
85.8 % v7 (old) | 10/2019 | OnePlus 7T SD 855+, Adreno 640 | 190 g | 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash | 6.55" | 2400x1080 |
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
|
iluminação: 91 %
iluminação com acumulador: 510 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Preto: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.6 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 2.9 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
140.4% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.242
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.7" | Samsung Galaxy Note10 Dynamic AMOLED, 2280x1080, 6.3" | Huawei Mate 30 Pro OLED, 2400x1176, 6.5" | Apple iPhone 11 IPS, 1792x828, 6.1" | Xiaomi Mi Note 10 AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.5" | OnePlus 7T AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.6" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | 35% | 29% | 49% | 15% | 29% | |
Brightness middle | 510 | 764 50% | 592 16% | 679 33% | 625 23% | 693 36% |
Brightness | 536 | 757 41% | 605 13% | 671 25% | 607 13% | 703 31% |
Brightness Distribution | 91 | 91 0% | 96 5% | 93 2% | 89 -2% | 96 5% |
Black Level * | 0.68 | |||||
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 6.6 | 2.66 60% | 2.5 62% | 0.8 88% | 4.38 34% | 3.42 48% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 17.56 | 5.65 68% | 5.5 69% | 2.4 86% | 6.83 61% | 6.12 65% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.9 | 3.2 -10% | 2.6 10% | 1.1 62% | 4.1 -41% | 3.3 -14% |
Gamma | 2.242 98% | 2.073 106% | 2.16 102% | 2.24 98% | 2.251 98% | 2.265 97% |
CCT | 6989 93% | 6326 103% | 6173 105% | 6610 98% | 7251 90% | 6799 96% |
Contrast | 999 |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 229.4 Hz | ||
The display backlight flickers at 229.4 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 229.4 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 8710 (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 (20.9 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
10 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 5 ms rise | |
↘ 5 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. » 20 % 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 Note10 Lite | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 | |
Huawei Mate 30 Pro | |
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 | |
OnePlus 7T | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (5736 - 6571, n=4) | |
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 | |
Huawei Mate 30 Pro | |
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 | |
OnePlus 7T | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (5184 - 5851, n=4) |
Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0) | |
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=169, last 2 years) | |
Huawei Mate 30 Pro (Chrome 78) | |
OnePlus 7T (Chrome 76) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 (Chrome 76) | |
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 (Chrome 78) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 () | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite (Chrome 80) |
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0) | |
OnePlus 7T (Chrome 76) | |
Huawei Mate 30 Pro (Chrome 78) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 (Chrome 76) | |
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 (Chrome 78) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (62.9 - 69.6, n=4) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite (Chrome 80) |
Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0) | |
Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=152, last 2 years) | |
Huawei Mate 30 Pro (Chrome 78) | |
OnePlus 7T (Chome 76) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 (Chome 76) | |
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 (Chrome 78) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite (Chome 80) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 () |
WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0) | |
Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years) | |
Huawei Mate 30 Pro (Chrome 78) | |
OnePlus 7T (Chrome 76) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 (Chrome 76) | |
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 (Chrome 78) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite (Chrome 80) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (63 - 72, n=4) |
Octane V2 - Total Score | |
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0) | |
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=210, last 2 years) | |
OnePlus 7T (Chrome 76) | |
Huawei Mate 30 Pro (Chrome 78) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 (Chrome 76) | |
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 (Chrome 78) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (12933 - 15233, n=4) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite (Chrome 80) |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite (Chrome 80) | |
Xiaomi Mi Note 10 (Chrome 78) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9810 (2060 - 3189, n=4) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 (Chrome 76) | |
OnePlus 7T (Chrome 76) | |
Huawei Mate 30 Pro (Chrome 78) | |
Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=167, last 2 years) | |
Apple iPhone 11 (Safari Mobile 13.0) |
* ... smaller is better
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite | Samsung Galaxy Note10 | Huawei Mate 30 Pro | Xiaomi Mi Note 10 | OnePlus 7T | Average 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AndroBench 3-5 | 95% | 71% | -12% | 11% | 11% | 261% | |
Sequential Read 256KB | 777 | 1478 90% | 1781 129% | 480.5 -38% | 1406 81% | 760 ? -2% | 1887 ? 143% |
Sequential Write 256KB | 190.8 | 590 209% | 401.8 111% | 243.6 28% | 218.4 14% | 297 ? 56% | 1471 ? 671% |
Random Read 4KB | 132 | 194.2 47% | 226.4 72% | 106.2 -20% | 170.1 29% | 152.9 ? 16% | 278 ? 111% |
Random Write 4KB | 142 | 191.9 35% | 259.2 83% | 118.9 -16% | 29.9 -79% | 131.6 ? -7% | 311 ? 119% |
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 73.5 ? | 82.5 ? 12% | 76 ? 3% | ||||
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 59.8 ? | 69.2 ? 16% | 59.6 ? 0% |
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 39.4 °C / 103 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 39.1 °C / 102 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.1 °C / 84 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 70.2% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 70.2% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 70.2% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (130.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 98% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 0% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 99% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 0% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Samsung Galaxy Note10 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.7% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 32% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 52% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 40% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
desligado | 0.1 / 0.2 Watt |
Ocioso | 0.9 / 1.6 / 1.9 Watt |
Carga |
8.4 / 10.3 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite 4500 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Note10 3500 mAh | Huawei Mate 30 Pro 4500 mAh | Apple iPhone 11 3110 mAh | Xiaomi Mi Note 10 5260 mAh | OnePlus 7T 3800 mAh | Average Samsung Exynos 9810 | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | 5% | 18% | -2% | 12% | 4% | 19% | 10% | |
Idle Minimum * | 0.9 | 0.9 -0% | 0.87 3% | 0.56 38% | 0.7 22% | 0.9 -0% | 0.783 ? 13% | 0.883 ? 2% |
Idle Average * | 1.6 | 1.2 25% | 1.75 -9% | 2.99 -87% | 1.8 -13% | 1.4 12% | 1.315 ? 18% | 1.467 ? 8% |
Idle Maximum * | 1.9 | 2 -5% | 1.83 4% | 3.02 -59% | 2.2 -16% | 2.9 -53% | 1.903 ? -0% | 1.621 ? 15% |
Load Average * | 8.4 | 7.7 8% | 3.85 54% | 4.17 50% | 5.2 38% | 4.7 44% | 5.76 ? 31% | 6.55 ? 22% |
Load Maximum * | 10.3 | 10.5 -2% | 6.64 36% | 5.44 47% | 7.5 27% | 8.3 19% | 7.06 ? 31% | 9.9 ? 4% |
* ... smaller is better
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite 4500 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Note10 3500 mAh | Huawei Mate 30 Pro 4500 mAh | Apple iPhone 11 3110 mAh | Xiaomi Mi Note 10 5260 mAh | OnePlus 7T 3800 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | -27% | -7% | 6% | 24% | -4% | |
Reader / Idle | 2205 | 1392 -37% | 2174 -1% | 2765 25% | 2134 -3% | 2003 -9% |
H.264 | 1071 | 803 -25% | 1098 3% | 1147 7% | 1423 33% | 967 -10% |
WiFi v1.3 | 904 | 583 -36% | 823 -9% | 866 -4% | 1127 25% | 896 -1% |
Load | 274 | 246 -10% | 219 -20% | 267 -3% | 387 41% | 283 3% |
Pro
Contra
Veredicto - Opção barata com modificações
O Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite é uma versão mais barata dos smartphones carros-chefes da Samsung. Isso se torna imediatamente aparente a partir da carcaça de plástico bastante simplista, SoC de gama média, alto-falante mono básico, a luminosidade da tela ligeiramente mais baixa e a quantidade reduzida de frequências LTE suportadas.
No entanto, o Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite não precisa ser visto como uma versão reduzida. Dependendo das preferências do usuário, o Note10 Lite pode até ter algumas vantagens, com a maior duração da bateria provavelmente sendo a mais relevante. Quem prefere áudio analógico tem acesso a um conector de áudio de 3,5 mm e os fanáticos de expansão de armazenamento podem usar um cartão microSD para aumentar o espaço de armazenamento. O Galaxy Note10 não possui nenhuma dessas opções.
O Samsung Galaxy Note10 é um ponto de entrada relativamente barato na família de dispositivos Galaxy Note e recebe uma recomendação nossa.
Além disso, a qualidade da imagem das câmeras é boa, o GPS é preciso, o software é moderno e a excelente caneta é quase única, pois abre toda uma gama de novas possibilidades com apenas alguns recursos ausentes em comparação com os outros smartphones Note10.
Recomendamos o Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite para quem sempre quis um smartphone Galaxy Note mais barato. Embora possa valer a pena dar uma olhada no Galaxy Note 9, que, embora tenha alguns meses mais velho, pode ser comprado a um preço semelhante ao Note10 Lite.
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite
- 09/03/2022 v7 (old)
Florian Schmitt