Breve Análise do Smartphone Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 88 %
iluminação com acumulador: 429 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Preto: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.39 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 3.3 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
99% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.238
| Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition Super AMOLED, 2248x1080, 6.2" | Xiaomi Mi 6 IPS, 1920x1080, 5.2" | Xiaomi Black Shark IPS, 2160x1080, 6" | Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S IPS, 2160x1080, 6" | Huawei P20 LTPS, 2240x1080, 5.8" | OnePlus 6 Optic AMOLED, 2280x1080, 6.3" | HTC U12 Plus Super LCD 6, 2880x1440, 6" | Samsung Galaxy S9 Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 5.8" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | -15% | -37% | -0% | 54% | 12% | 24% | 32% | |
| Brightness middle | 429 | 620 45% | 549 28% | 492 15% | 753 76% | 430 0% | 395 -8% | 529 23% |
| Brightness | 432 | 586 36% | 541 25% | 463 7% | 748 73% | 437 1% | 402 -7% | 527 22% |
| Brightness Distribution | 88 | 89 1% | 95 8% | 90 2% | 96 9% | 87 -1% | 90 2% | 96 9% |
| Black Level * | 0.28 | 0.42 | 0.59 | 0.37 | 0.37 | |||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 3.39 | 4.8 -42% | 6.08 -79% | 2.4 29% | 1.3 62% | 2.3 32% | 1.6 53% | 1.4 59% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 5.25 | 8.8 -68% | 10.69 -104% | 6.2 -18% | 2.3 56% | 4.6 12% | 3.4 35% | 4 24% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 3.3 | 5.3 -61% | 6.6 -100% | 4.5 -36% | 1.7 48% | 2.4 27% | 1.1 67% | 1.6 52% |
| Gamma | 2.238 98% | 2.25 98% | 2.305 95% | 2.25 98% | 2.18 101% | 2.28 96% | 2.14 103% | 2.16 102% |
| CCT | 7135 91% | 7473 87% | 8399 77% | 6395 102% | 66.76 9736% | 6160 106% | 6536 99% | 6358 102% |
| Contrast | 2214 | 1307 | 834 | 2035 | 1068 |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 100 Hz |  | |
The display backlight flickers at 100 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 100 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8706 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 5 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 3 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows fast response rates in our tests and should be suited for gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 18 % 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). | ||
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
| OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66) | |
| HTC U12 Plus (Chrome 66) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition (Chrome 69) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (22.5 - 90.9, n=25) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 6 (Chrome Version 58) | |
| Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S (Chrome 66.0.3359.158) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0) | |
| Huawei P20 (Chrome 66.0.3359.126) | |
| Xiaomi Black Shark | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=210, last 2 years) | |
| OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66) | |
| HTC U12 Plus (Chrome 66) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (3991 - 18275, n=28) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition (Chrome 69) | |
| Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S (Chrome 66.0.3359.158) | |
| Xiaomi Black Shark (Firefox 61) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 6 (Chrome Version 58) | |
| Huawei P20 (Chrome 66.0.3359.126) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Huawei P20 (Chrome 66.0.3359.126) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2154 - 11204, n=28) | |
| Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S (Chrome 66.0.3359.158) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 6 (Chrome Version 58) | |
| OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66) | |
| HTC U12 Plus (Chrome 66) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition (Chrome 69) | |
| Xiaomi Black Shark (Firefox 61) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=167, last 2 years) | |
| WebXPRT 2015 - Overall | |
| HTC U12 Plus (Chrome 66) | |
| OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition (Chrome 69) | |
| Xiaomi Black Shark (Firefox 61) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (96 - 291, n=23) | |
| Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S (Chrome 66.0.3359.158) | |
| Huawei P20 (Chrome 66.0.3359.126) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0) | |
* ... smaller is better
| Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition | Xiaomi Mi 6 | Xiaomi Black Shark | Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S | Huawei P20 | OnePlus 6 | HTC U12 Plus | Samsung Galaxy S9 | Average 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | 5% | 101% | 119% | 159% | 0% | 86% | 5% | 137% | 544% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 692 | 728 5% | 742 7% | 756 9% | 827 20% | 726 5% | 709 2% | 815 18% | 760 ? 10% | 1894 ? 174% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 205.2 | 196.7 -4% | 199.6 -3% | 208.1 1% | 193.6 -6% | 201.4 -2% | 195.8 -5% | 206.9 1% | 297 ? 45% | 1476 ? 619% |
| Random Read 4KB | 135.2 | 143.5 6% | 127.2 -6% | 135.1 0% | 147 9% | 137 1% | 118.1 -13% | 131 -3% | 152.9 ? 13% | 278 ? 106% |
| Random Write 4KB | 22.65 | 25.19 11% | 114.1 404% | 128.4 467% | 161.5 613% | 21.8 -4% | 104.2 360% | 23.07 2% | 131.6 ? 481% | 312 ? 1277% |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 84.3 ? | 79.2 ? | 76 ? | |||||||
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 63.6 ? | 67.2 ? | 59.6 ? |
| Asphalt 9: Legends | |||
| Configurações | Valor | ||
| High Quality | 30 fps | ||
| PUBG Mobile | |||
| Configurações | Valor | ||
| HD | 30 fps | ||
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 44.1 °C / 111 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 42.8 °C / 109 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 31.3 °C / 88 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (78.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 30% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 61% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 50% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 42% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
OnePlus 6 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 62.6% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 62.6% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 62.6% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (108.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 86% of all tested devices in this class were better, 0% similar, 14% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 96% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 4% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado |   0.1 / 0.6 Watt |
| Ocioso |  1.8 / 2.9 / 3.5 Watt |
| Carga |
4.8 / 11.2 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition 3000 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 6 3350 mAh | Xiaomi Black Shark 4000 mAh | Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S 3400 mAh | Huawei P20 3400 mAh | OnePlus 6 3300 mAh | HTC U12 Plus 3500 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S9 3000 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 42% | 30% | 25% | 26% | 44% | 20% | 53% | 30% | 26% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 1.8 | 0.45 75% | 0.8 56% | 0.75 58% | 0.67 63% | 0.6 67% | 0.77 57% | 0.65 64% | 0.862 ? 52% | 0.883 ? 51% |
| Idle Average * | 2.9 | 1.67 42% | 1.5 48% | 2.25 22% | 2.05 29% | 1 66% | 2.18 25% | 0.81 72% | 1.728 ? 40% | 1.467 ? 49% |
| Idle Maximum * | 3.5 | 1.69 52% | 2.3 34% | 2.26 35% | 2.11 40% | 1.6 54% | 2.21 37% | 0.92 74% | 2.07 ? 41% | 1.621 ? 54% |
| Load Average * | 4.8 | 4.07 15% | 4.8 -0% | 4.89 -2% | 6.15 -28% | 4.3 10% | 6.25 -30% | 4.76 1% | 4.87 ? -1% | 6.58 ? -37% |
| Load Maximum * | 11.2 | 8.54 24% | 10.1 10% | 9.6 14% | 8.09 28% | 8.6 23% | 10.16 9% | 5.16 54% | 9.27 ? 17% | 9.91 ? 12% |
* ... smaller is better
| Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition 3000 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 6 3350 mAh | Xiaomi Black Shark 4000 mAh | Xiaomi Mi Mix 2S 3400 mAh | Huawei P20 3400 mAh | OnePlus 6 3300 mAh | HTC U12 Plus 3500 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S9 3000 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 6% | 10% | 7% | 24% | 14% | -13% | -24% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1401 | 1753 25% | 1678 20% | 1888 35% | 1806 29% | 1452 4% | 1182 -16% | |
| H.264 | 921 | 747 -19% | 718 -22% | 810 -12% | 791 -14% | 464 -50% | 609 -34% | |
| WiFi v1.3 | 694 | 739 6% | 711 2% | 716 3% | 818 18% | 762 10% | 507 -27% | 474 -32% |
| Load | 191 | 253 32% | 239 25% | 295 54% | 246 29% | 230 20% | 164 -14% |
Pro
Contra
A Xiaomi criou um dos smartphones com melhor relação custo-benefício deste ano, algo que não esperávamos, dados os dispositivos Mi anteriores. Inclusive recomendamos a atualização do Mi 6 para o Mi 8 pelas ótimas melhorias e refinamentos
Se você se deparar com a pergunta sobre qual versão do Mi 8 deve escolher, então nossa resposta é clara: Escolha o Mi 8 regular, particularmente agora que está 200 Euros (~$231) mais barato. Ignorando a diferença de preço, o Mi 8 regular é o melhor smartphone com sua duração de bateria superior e seu sensor de digitais mais confiável. O Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition vai atrair olhares com sua parte traseira marcante, seus 2 GB adicionais de RAM e tecnologias biométricas inovadoras. Este último não é mais rápido do que os mais convencionais que o Mi8 regular usa.
Você não irá errar com o Xiaomi Mi 8, mas não é o melhor smartphone do ano.
Independentemente do Explorer Edition, o Mi 8 é um impressionante smartphone premium. No entanto, o dispositivo está longe de ser um smartphone top do 2018. As câmeras, o alto-falante, o software, o GPS e a falta de certificação IP e carregamento sem fio distinguem o Mi 8 Explorer Edition dos carros-chefe mais caros. Isso é aceitável, dado o preço da Explorer Edition, especialmente considerando que a Xiaomi fez muitas coisas bem com o dispositivo.
Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition
- 09/24/2018 v6 (old)
Marcus Herbrich
Price comparison
