Breve Análise do Smartphone Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 (SM-G390F)
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| AGM A8 | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| AGM A8 | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 88 %
iluminação com acumulador: 445 cd/m²
Contraste: 664:1 (Preto: 0.67 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.5 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 7.2 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.53
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 IPS, 1280x720, 5" | Samsung Galaxy Xcover 3 IPS, 800x480, 4.5" | Huawei P10 Lite IPS, 1920x1080, 5.2" | Motorola Moto X Force AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.4" | AGM A8 IPS, 1280x720, 5" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 14% | 31% | 18% | 41% | |
| Brightness middle | 445 | 452 2% | 507 14% | 337 -24% | 356 -20% |
| Brightness | 437 | 436 0% | 509 16% | 336 -23% | 343 -22% |
| Brightness Distribution | 88 | 91 3% | 95 8% | 91 3% | 93 6% |
| Black Level * | 0.67 | 0.53 21% | 0.36 46% | 0.21 69% | |
| Contrast | 664 | 853 28% | 1408 112% | 1695 155% | |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 6.5 | 5.71 12% | 5.1 22% | 3.99 39% | 3.7 43% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 10.6 | 9 15% | 7.07 33% | 8.3 22% | |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 7.2 | 5.02 30% | 6.1 15% | 1.66 77% | 1.9 74% |
| Gamma | 2.53 87% | 2.15 102% | 2.28 96% | 2.32 95% | 2.5 88% |
| CCT | 8274 79% | 7441 87% | 8143 80% | 6584 99% | 6412 101% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 20400 Hz | ≤ 90 % brightness setting |  |
The display backlight flickers at 20400 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 90 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 20400 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8719 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 16 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 7 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 9 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. » 33 % 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 | ||
| 36 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 17 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 19 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 46 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). | ||
| AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Motorola Moto X Force | |
| AGM A8 | |
| GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | |
| T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Xcover 3 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Motorola Moto X Force | |
| AGM A8 | |
| 1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Xcover 3 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Motorola Moto X Force | |
| AGM A8 | |
| GFXBench 3.0 | |
| on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Xcover 3 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Motorola Moto X Force | |
| AGM A8 | |
| 1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Xcover 3 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Motorola Moto X Force | |
| AGM A8 | |
| GFXBench 3.1 | |
| on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Motorola Moto X Force | |
| 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Motorola Moto X Force | |
| PCMark for Android | |
| Work performance score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Motorola Moto X Force | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Geekbench 4.4 | |
| 64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| AGM A8 | |
| 64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Motorola Moto X Force | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Xcover 3 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Motorola Moto X Force | |
| AGM A8 | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Motorola Moto X Force | |
| AGM A8 | |
| WebXPRT 2015 - Overall (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Motorola Moto X Force | |
* ... smaller is better
| AndroBench 3-5 | |
| Sequential Read 256KB (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Xcover 3 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Motorola Moto X Force | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Sequential Write 256KB (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Xcover 3 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Motorola Moto X Force | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Random Read 4KB (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Xcover 3 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Motorola Moto X Force | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Random Write 4KB (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Xcover 3 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Motorola Moto X Force | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Motorola Moto X Force | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Huawei P10 Lite | |
| Motorola Moto X Force | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Asphalt 8: Airborne | |||
| Configurações | Valor | ||
| high | 23 fps | ||
| very low | 30 fps | ||
| Dead Trigger 2 | |||
| Configurações | Valor | ||
| high | 30 fps | ||
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 38.2 °C / 101 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 37.5 °C / 100 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 XCover 4 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.4% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 52% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 40% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 70% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 24% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
AGM A8 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 30.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 10% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 9.1% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (32.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 82% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 17% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 91% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 8% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado |   0.006 / 0.1 Watt |
| Ocioso |  0.56 / 1.57 / 1.68 Watt |
| Carga |
4.6 / 5.92 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 2800 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Xcover 3 mAh | Huawei P10 Lite 3000 mAh | Motorola Moto X Force 3760 mAh | AGM A8 4050 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 24% | 7% | -26% | -23% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.56 | 0.6 -7% | 0.38 32% | 0.96 -71% | 0.86 -54% |
| Idle Average * | 1.57 | 1.2 24% | 1.87 -19% | 1.35 14% | 1.97 -25% |
| Idle Maximum * | 1.68 | 1.3 23% | 1.92 -14% | 1.4 17% | 2.04 -21% |
| Load Average * | 4.6 | 2.6 43% | 3.82 17% | 6.11 -33% | 4.86 -6% |
| Load Maximum * | 5.92 | 3.6 39% | 4.9 17% | 9.43 -59% | 6.43 -9% |
* ... smaller is better
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 2800 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Xcover 3 mAh | Huawei P10 Lite 3000 mAh | Motorola Moto X Force 3760 mAh | AGM A8 4050 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -18% | 7% | 11% | -2% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1388 | 1002 -28% | 1410 2% | 1610 16% | |
| H.264 | 681 | 678 0% | 586 -14% | 710 4% | |
| WiFi v1.3 | 668 | 503 -25% | 665 0% | 426 -36% | 654 -2% |
| Load | 205 | 166 -19% | 286 40% | 330 61% |
Pro
Contra
Mesmo que o Galaxy XCover 4 da Samsung não seja tão resistente quanto parece, ele está protegido melhor do que muitos outros smartphones muito sensíveis. A carcaça de plástico robusta não parece volumosa e até a bateria pode ser substituída. A proteção contra água e poeira foi aumentada em comparação com o antecessor, e o falante agora funciona de forma impecável quando o telefone está molhado. Depois de usá-lo na água, encontramos uma gota de água debaixo da tampa traseira. Por isso, o aparelho deve ser seco separadamente aqui.
A configuração de armazenamento do aparelho poderia ser mais generosa, mas o seu sistema operacional extensivo e a câmera primária bastante útil, são convincentes. As opções de entrada são diversas, a tela é adequada e o desempenho suficiente para a rotina diária. A duração da bateria também se adapta bem à boa impressão geral. Não gostamos da qualidade de som e do desempenho dos jogo do aparelho.
Como seu antecessor, o Galaxy XCover 4 não é adequado para situações extremas, mas bastante bem equipado para as incertezas da vida cotidiana. A carcaça dura esconde um smartphone sólido, de gama média baixa.
Os usuários que precisam de um smartphone extremamente robusto e de agam alta para situações extremas terão que dar uma olhada nos especialistas. A Samsung oferece um aparelho sólido para um uso de rotina ligeiramente mais exigente, para caminhadas ou a visita ocasional a um local de construção empoeirado. Dado que o dispositivo é relativamente barato e pode servir com GPS muito bom, é bastante adequado para essas situações.
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4
- 06/12/2017 v6 (old)
Florian Wimmer
Price comparison
