Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarBreve Análise do Smartphone Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite: Muito por pouco
Vergleichsgeräte
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Drive | Size | Resolution | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 80.5 % v7 (old) | 12/2019 | Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite SD 710, Adreno 616 | 179 g | 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash | 6.39" | 2340x1080 | |
| 79.8 % v7 (old) | 04/2019 | Samsung Galaxy A50 Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3 | 166 g | 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 6.40" | 2340x1080 | |
| 78.6 % v7 (old) | 10/2019 | Nokia 7.2 SD 660, Adreno 512 | 180 g | 64 GB eMMC Flash | 6.30" | 2340x1080 | |
| 77.3 % v7 (old) | 06/2019 | HTC Desire 19+ Helio P35 MT6765, PowerVR GE8320 | 170 g | 64 GB eMMC Flash | 6.20" | 1520x720 | |
| 78.4 % v7 (old) | 11/2019 | Motorola Moto G8 Plus SD 665, Adreno 610 | 188 g | 64 GB eMMC Flash | 6.30" | 2280x1080 |
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Nokia 7.2 | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite | |
| Samsung Galaxy A50 | |
| Motorola Moto G8 Plus | |
| HTC Desire 19+ | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite | |
| Nokia 7.2 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A50 | |
| HTC Desire 19+ | |
| Motorola Moto G8 Plus | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 97 %
iluminação com acumulador: 618 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Preto: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 1.6 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
95.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.24
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.4" | Samsung Galaxy A50 AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.4" | Nokia 7.2 IPS, 2340x1080, 6.3" | HTC Desire 19+ IPS, 1520x720, 6.2" | Motorola Moto G8 Plus IPS, 2280x1080, 6.3" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | -85% | -175% | -134% | -172% | |
| Brightness middle | 618 | 644 4% | 604 -2% | 491 -21% | 597 -3% |
| Brightness | 626 | 628 0% | 593 -5% | 470 -25% | 596 -5% |
| Brightness Distribution | 97 | 91 -6% | 92 -5% | 84 -13% | 93 -4% |
| Black Level * | 0.4 | 0.33 | 0.52 | ||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1 | 2.64 -164% | 5.1 -410% | 4.34 -334% | 5.93 -493% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 2.4 | 9.23 -285% | 10.3 -329% | 8.17 -240% | 9.42 -293% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.6 | 2.5 -56% | 6.4 -300% | 4.3 -169% | 5.3 -231% |
| Gamma | 2.24 98% | 2.024 109% | 2.23 99% | 2.302 96% | 2.232 99% |
| CCT | 6389 102% | 6649 98% | 8149 80% | 7214 90% | 7632 85% |
| Contrast | 1510 | 1488 | 1148 |
* ... 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 8746 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 1.6 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 1.2 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. » 10 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 2 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 2 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 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 11 % 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) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite | |
| Samsung Galaxy A50 | |
| HTC Desire 19+ | |
| Motorola Moto G8 Plus | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (7041 - 9345, n=6) | |
| Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite | |
| Samsung Galaxy A50 | |
| Nokia 7.2 | |
| HTC Desire 19+ | |
| Motorola Moto G8 Plus | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (6453 - 7460, n=6) | |
| GFXBench 3.0 | |
| on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite | |
| Samsung Galaxy A50 | |
| Nokia 7.2 | |
| Motorola Moto G8 Plus | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (20 - 40, n=6) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (6.8 - 165, n=169, last 2 years) | |
| 1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite | |
| Samsung Galaxy A50 | |
| Nokia 7.2 | |
| Motorola Moto G8 Plus | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (32 - 33, n=6) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (12 - 482, n=169, last 2 years) | |
| GFXBench 3.1 | |
| on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite | |
| Samsung Galaxy A50 | |
| Nokia 7.2 | |
| Motorola Moto G8 Plus | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (19 - 30, n=6) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (3.7 - 158, n=169, last 2 years) | |
| 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite | |
| Samsung Galaxy A50 | |
| Nokia 7.2 | |
| Motorola Moto G8 Plus | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (23 - 23, n=6) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (8.3 - 341, n=169, last 2 years) | |
| AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite | |
| Nokia 7.2 | |
| Motorola Moto G8 Plus | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (172068 - 205722, n=2) | |
| Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=161, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite (Chrome 78) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (29 - 38.5, n=3) | |
| Motorola Moto G8 Plus (Chrome 78) | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite (Chrome 78) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (50.5 - 66.6, n=6) | |
| Motorola Moto G8 Plus (Chrome 78) | |
| Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
| Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=146, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite (Chrome 78) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (29 - 38.7, n=3) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A50 (Chome 73) | |
| Motorola Moto G8 Plus (Chrome 78) | |
| WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
| Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite (Chrome 78) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (57 - 72, n=6) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A50 (Chrome 73) | |
| Motorola Moto G8 Plus (Chrome 78) | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=203, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite (Chrome 78) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (9771 - 12802, n=6) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A50 (Chrome 73) | |
| Motorola Moto G8 Plus (Chrome 78) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Motorola Moto G8 Plus (Chrome 78) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A50 (Chrome 73) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite (Chrome 78) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 (3035 - 3800, n=6) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=160, last 2 years) | |
* ... smaller is better
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite | Samsung Galaxy A50 | Nokia 7.2 | HTC Desire 19+ | Motorola Moto G8 Plus | Average 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -20% | -32% | -29% | -19% | -4% | 278% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 421.5 | 507 20% | 290.8 -31% | 288 -32% | 302.5 -28% | 530 ? 26% | 1839 ? 336% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 252.1 | 192.1 -24% | 161.4 -36% | 210.8 -16% | 217.4 -14% | 212 ? -16% | 1425 ? 465% |
| Random Read 4KB | 113.5 | 98.9 -13% | 79.6 -30% | 76.5 -33% | 59.9 -47% | 130.6 ? 15% | 277 ? 144% |
| Random Write 4KB | 116.6 | 18.2 -84% | 13.38 -89% | 20.4 -83% | 124.9 7% | 101.2 ? -13% | 309 ? 165% |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 86 ? | 73.9 ? -14% | 83.3 ? -3% | 81.8 ? -5% | 72.6 ? -16% | 68.3 ? -21% | |
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 63.9 ? | 60.7 ? -5% | 64 ? 0% | 61.8 ? -3% | 52.2 ? -18% | 53.2 ? -17% |
Asphalt 9: Legends
Arena of Valor
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 40.8 °C / 105 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 39.7 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.9 °C / 82 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.4% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.4% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 29% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 62% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 49% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 43% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 68.5% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 68.5% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 68.5% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (121% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 88% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 2% 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, 3% similar, 1% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado |   0 / 0.1 Watt |
| Ocioso |  0.8 / 1.2 / 1.6 Watt |
| Carga |
2.6 / 4.5 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite 4030 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A50 4000 mAh | Nokia 7.2 3500 mAh | HTC Desire 19+ 3850 mAh | Motorola Moto G8 Plus 4000 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -48% | -61% | -52% | -94% | -16% | -60% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.8 | 0.8 -0% | 0.77 4% | 1.3 -63% | 1.7 -113% | 0.772 ? 3% | 0.894 ? -12% |
| Idle Average * | 1.2 | 1.5 -25% | 2.32 -93% | 2 -67% | 2.3 -92% | 1.474 ? -23% | 1.456 ? -21% |
| Idle Maximum * | 1.6 | 1.7 -6% | 2.41 -51% | 2.9 -81% | 3.5 -119% | 1.882 ? -18% | 1.616 ? -1% |
| Load Average * | 2.6 | 5.9 -127% | 4.44 -71% | 3.6 -38% | 4.7 -81% | 3.33 ? -28% | 6.45 ? -148% |
| Load Maximum * | 4.5 | 8.3 -84% | 8.79 -95% | 5 -11% | 7.5 -67% | 5.2 ? -16% | 9.8 ? -118% |
* ... smaller is better
| Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite 4030 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A50 4000 mAh | Nokia 7.2 3500 mAh | HTC Desire 19+ 3850 mAh | Motorola Moto G8 Plus 4000 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -11% | -22% | 8% | 8% | |
| Reader / Idle | 2957 | 1587 -46% | 2002 -32% | ||
| H.264 | 891 | 869 -2% | 996 12% | ||
| WiFi v1.3 | 734 | 701 -4% | 570 -22% | 795 8% | 980 34% |
| Load | 254 | 275 8% | 302 19% |
Pro
Contra
A Xiaomi quer provar mais uma vez que a boa conectividade e um desempenho decente não precisam necessariamente ser caros. O Mi 9 Lite foi capaz de superar seus concorrentes em muitos de nossos testes e apresenta recursos como o leitor de digitais na tela e o zoom óptico de 2x em sua classe de smartphones acessíveis, até então limitados a dispositivos de última geração mais caros.
A Xiaomi conseguiu fazer quase tudo certo com o Mi 9 Lite. Nossa única queixa principal é o fato de que algumas configurações exigem que uma conexão ativa à Internet seja alterada.
A duração da bateria é boa, mas poderia ter sido um pouco melhor. A principal falha está no software. Embora a localização seja impecável, o fato de algumas configurações exigirem uma conexão ativa com a Internet e uma conta Xiaomi não é aceitável.
Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite
- 08/31/2022 v7 (old)
Mike Wobker
Price comparison
