Breve Análise do Smartphone Xiaomi Mi 9
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
|
iluminação: 94 %
iluminação com acumulador: 593 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Preto: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 0.9 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 1.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
95.4% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.27
Xiaomi Mi 9 AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.4" | Apple iPhone XR IPS, 1792x828, 6.1" | Huawei Mate 20 Pro OLED, 3120x1440, 6.3" | Honor View 20 LTPS, 2310x1080, 6.4" | OnePlus 6T Optic AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.4" | Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus OLED, 3040x1440, 6.4" | Xiaomi Mi 8 AMOLED, 2248x1080, 6.2" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | -18% | -22% | -79% | -58% | -113% | -157% | |
Brightness middle | 593 | 672 13% | 576 -3% | 492 -17% | 437 -26% | 710 20% | 430 -27% |
Brightness | 587 | 641 9% | 582 -1% | 475 -19% | 442 -25% | 721 23% | 434 -26% |
Brightness Distribution | 94 | 92 -2% | 90 -4% | 94 0% | 95 1% | 97 3% | 94 0% |
Black Level * | 0.35 | 0.4 | |||||
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 0.9 | 1.3 -44% | 1.3 -44% | 2.4 -167% | 2.21 -146% | 3.7 -311% | 5.09 -466% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 2 | 2.7 -35% | 3.5 -75% | 5.2 -160% | 4.27 -114% | 10.3 -415% | 8.05 -303% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.5 | 2.2 -47% | 1.6 -7% | 3.2 -113% | 2.1 -40% | 1.5 -0% | 3.3 -120% |
Gamma | 2.27 97% | 2.3 96% | 2.18 101% | 2.06 107% | 2.307 95% | 2.1 105% | 2.257 97% |
CCT | 6548 99% | 6868 95% | 6561 99% | 7125 91% | 6353 102% | 6611 98% | 7026 93% |
Contrast | 1920 | 1230 |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 245.1 Hz | ≤ 99 % brightness setting | |
The display backlight flickers at 245.1 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 245.1 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 8746 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 12 % 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 | ||
4.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 2.4 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. » 12 % 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 | |
Huawei Mate 20 Pro | |
Honor View 20 | |
OnePlus 6T | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus | |
Xiaomi Mi 8 | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (10330 - 14439, n=19) | |
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
Huawei Mate 20 Pro | |
Honor View 20 | |
OnePlus 6T | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus | |
Xiaomi Mi 8 | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (8342 - 11440, n=19) |
Basemark GPU 1.1 | |
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
Huawei Mate 20 Pro | |
OnePlus 6T | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (24.5 - 36.3, n=3) | |
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
Huawei Mate 20 Pro | |
OnePlus 6T | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (22.7 - 32.2, n=2) | |
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
Huawei Mate 20 Pro | |
OnePlus 6T | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (33.1 - 37.4, n=3) |
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
Huawei Mate 20 Pro | |
Honor View 20 | |
OnePlus 6T | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (217967 - 398720, n=16) |
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
Huawei Mate 20 Pro | |
Honor View 20 | |
OnePlus 6T | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus | |
Xiaomi Mi 8 | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (239512 - 268271, n=12) |
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
Apple iPhone XR | |
Huawei Mate 20 Pro | |
OnePlus 6T | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (1075 - 1425, n=4) | |
Average of class Smartphone (205 - 7616, n=56, last 2 years) |
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75) | |
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (84.4 - 120, n=17) | |
Honor View 20 (Chrome 71) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus (Samsung Browser 9.0) | |
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70) | |
Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72) |
Octane V2 - Total Score | |
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0) | |
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=203, last 2 years) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (17011 - 33918, n=21) | |
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69) | |
Honor View 20 (Chrome 71) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus (Samsung Browser 9.0) | |
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70) | |
Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72) |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72) | |
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (1852 - 2611, n=19) | |
Honor View 20 (Chrome 71) | |
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus (Samsung Browser 9.0) | |
Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=160, last 2 years) | |
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0) |
WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0) | |
Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years) | |
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus (Samsung Browser 9.0) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (90 - 129, n=20) | |
Honor View 20 (Chrome 71) | |
Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72) |
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall | |
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0) | |
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus (Samsung Browser 9.0) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (260 - 316, n=2) | |
Honor View 20 (Chrome 71) | |
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70) | |
Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72) | |
Xiaomi Mi 9 |
* ... smaller is better
Xiaomi Mi 9 | Huawei Mate 20 Pro | Honor View 20 | OnePlus 6T | Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus | Xiaomi Mi 8 | Average 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AndroBench 3-5 | -5% | -3% | -33% | -28% | -35% | -24% | 154% | |
Sequential Read 256KB | 666 | 853 28% | 847 27% | 735 10% | 811 22% | 693 4% | 696 ? 5% | 1839 ? 176% |
Sequential Write 256KB | 388.3 | 196.4 -49% | 250.1 -36% | 204.4 -47% | 249.1 -36% | 207.8 -46% | 224 ? -42% | 1425 ? 267% |
Random Read 4KB | 149.4 | 157.4 5% | 168.9 13% | 138.5 -7% | 135.2 -10% | 136.3 -9% | 137.2 ? -8% | 277 ? 85% |
Random Write 4KB | 165.3 | 157.8 -5% | 138.9 -16% | 22 -87% | 22.7 -86% | 21 -87% | 84.7 ? -49% | 309 ? 87% |
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 83.2 ? | 73 ? | 68.6 ? | |||||
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 72.4 ? | 60.7 ? | 52.2 ? |
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 31.8 °C / 89 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 30.9 °C / 88 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 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 9% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 85% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 29% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 63% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Xiaomi Mi 8 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 64.6% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 64.6% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 64.6% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (124.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 93% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 1% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 98% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 0% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
desligado | 0.01 / 0.24 Watt |
Ocioso | 0.67 / 1.26 / 1.29 Watt |
Carga |
3.71 / 9.3 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Xiaomi Mi 9 3300 mAh | Apple iPhone XR 2942 mAh | Huawei Mate 20 Pro 4200 mAh | Honor View 20 4000 mAh | OnePlus 6T 3700 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus 4100 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 8 3400 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -38% | -35% | -58% | -11% | -30% | -76% | -24% | -31% | |
Idle Minimum * | 0.67 | 0.61 9% | 0.95 -42% | 0.97 -45% | 0.7 -4% | 0.73 -9% | 1.5 -124% | 0.939 ? -40% | 0.894 ? -33% |
Idle Average * | 1.26 | 2.67 -112% | 2.17 -72% | 2.58 -105% | 1.1 13% | 1.53 -21% | 2.2 -75% | 1.506 ? -20% | 1.456 ? -16% |
Idle Maximum * | 1.29 | 2.69 -109% | 2.25 -74% | 2.63 -104% | 2.1 -63% | 2.07 -60% | 2.6 -102% | 1.799 ? -39% | 1.616 ? -25% |
Load Average * | 3.71 | 4.34 -17% | 4.47 -20% | 5.24 -41% | 4.2 -13% | 6.03 -63% | 6.1 -64% | 4.61 ? -24% | 6.45 ? -74% |
Load Maximum * | 9.3 | 5.66 39% | 6.15 34% | 8.73 6% | 8.3 11% | 9.18 1% | 10.9 -17% | 9.04 ? 3% | 9.8 ? -5% |
* ... smaller is better
Xiaomi Mi 9 3300 mAh | Apple iPhone XR 2942 mAh | Huawei Mate 20 Pro 4200 mAh | Honor View 20 4000 mAh | OnePlus 6T 3700 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus 4100 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 8 3400 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | 47% | 19% | 25% | 25% | -8% | 9% | |
Reader / Idle | 1650 | 2969 80% | 1747 6% | 1928 17% | 1936 17% | 1560 -5% | 1634 -1% |
H.264 | 1008 | 1011 0% | 854 -15% | 932 -8% | 903 -10% | 921 -9% | 897 -11% |
WiFi v1.3 | 546 | 910 67% | 767 40% | 969 77% | 865 58% | 483 -12% | 736 35% |
Load | 194 | 270 39% | 282 45% | 222 14% | 261 35% | 187 -4% | 215 11% |
Pro
Contra
O Xiaomi Mi 9 é um smartphone triunfante que envergonha outros carros chefe por seu incrível valor pelo dinheiro. O modelo básico, que tem 6 GB de RAM e 64 GB de armazenamento, está bem equipado pelos padrões modernos de carros chefe. No entanto, o modelo de 128 GB pode ser uma escolha melhor para muitas pessoas porque o Mi 9 não suporta armazenamento expansível.
A Xiaomi equipou todos os modelos Mi 9 com excelentes câmeras traseiras triplas e uma tela AMOLED brilhante com precisão de cor exemplar, que cabe em uma carcaça de vidro elegante e de alta qualidade. O novo SoC Snapdragon 855 da Qualcomm também faz do Mi 9 um dos smartphones mais poderosos que o dinheiro pode comprar atualmente. Isso vai mudar com o lançamento de mais smartphones Snapdragon 855.
O Xiaomi Mi 9 é o smartphone para comprar se você está atrás de uma experiência de carro chefe, mas com um orçamento. Oferece tudo o que seus concorrentes oferecem, mas sem precisar gastar uma fortuna.
Embora tenhamos algumas queixas, como a falta de um fone de ouvido e nenhum suporte para cartão microSD, o Mi 9 está em boa companhia com muitos de seus concorrentes que também não têm esses recursos. A carcaça de vidro elegante também é propensa a digitais, e o compartimento da câmera traseira tripla faz o dispositivo balançar em uma mesa, mas esses problemas não prejudicam o que é uma das melhores experiências de smartphone que o dinheiro pode comprar no início de 2019.
Xiaomi Mi 9
- 08/31/2022 v7 (old)
Manuel Masiero