Breve Análise do Smartphone ZTE Axon 10 Pro: O assassino de carros-chefes da China
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| ZTE Axon 9 Pro | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
| ZTE Axon 10 Pro | |
| Nokia 9 PureView | |
| Samsung Galaxy S10e | |
| OnePlus 7 | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
| ZTE Axon 9 Pro | |
| Nokia 9 PureView | |
| ZTE Axon 10 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy S10e | |
| OnePlus 7 | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 92 %
iluminação com acumulador: 402 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Preto: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.1 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 3.7 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
99.6% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.23
| ZTE Axon 10 Pro AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.5" | ZTE Axon 9 Pro AMOLED, 2248x1080, 6.2" | OnePlus 7 AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.4" | Nokia 9 PureView P-OLED, 2880x1440, 6" | Xiaomi Mi 9 AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.4" | Samsung Galaxy S10e AMOLED, 2280x1080, 5.8" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 23% | 21% | 38% | 51% | 28% | |
| Brightness middle | 402 | 521 30% | 603 50% | 648 61% | 593 48% | 426 6% |
| Brightness | 399 | 517 30% | 605 52% | 641 61% | 587 47% | 427 7% |
| Brightness Distribution | 92 | 96 4% | 94 2% | 92 0% | 94 2% | 96 4% |
| Black Level * | ||||||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.1 | 2.9 29% | 3.5 15% | 2.3 44% | 0.9 78% | 2.14 48% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 6.5 | 5.5 15% | 7.7 -18% | 5.2 20% | 2 69% | 3.29 49% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 3.7 | 2.7 27% | 2.7 27% | 2.2 41% | 1.5 59% | 1.8 51% |
| Gamma | 2.23 99% | 2.01 109% | 2.266 97% | 2.3 96% | 2.27 97% | 2.111 104% |
| CCT | 7841 83% | 6288 103% | 6775 96% | 6592 99% | 6548 99% | 6329 103% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 277.8 Hz | ≤ 99 % brightness setting |  |
The display backlight flickers at 277.8 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 277.8 Hz is relatively high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. However, there are reports that some users are still sensitive to PWM at 500 Hz and above, so be aware. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8715 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 1.2 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 1.6 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 (20.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 3.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 2 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 1.6 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. » 10 % 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) | |
| ZTE Axon 10 Pro | |
| ZTE Axon 9 Pro | |
| OnePlus 7 | |
| Nokia 9 PureView | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S10e | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (10330 - 14439, n=19) | |
| Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value) | |
| ZTE Axon 10 Pro | |
| ZTE Axon 9 Pro | |
| OnePlus 7 | |
| Nokia 9 PureView | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S10e | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (8342 - 11440, n=19) | |
| AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| ZTE Axon 10 Pro | |
| ZTE Axon 9 Pro | |
| OnePlus 7 | |
| Nokia 9 PureView | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S10e | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (217967 - 398720, n=16) | |
| Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=169, last 2 years) | |
| OnePlus 7 (Chrome 74) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (45.5 - 67, n=16) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73) | |
| ZTE Axon 10 Pro (Chrome 74) | |
| Nokia 9 PureView (Chrome 73.0.3683.90) | |
| Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
| Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=152, last 2 years) | |
| OnePlus 7 (Chome 74) | |
| ZTE Axon 10 Pro (Chrome 74) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (42.5 - 67.9, n=15) | |
| Nokia 9 PureView (Chrome 73.0.3683.90) | |
| WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
| Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years) | |
| OnePlus 7 (Chrome 74) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (90 - 129, n=20) | |
| ZTE Axon 10 Pro (Chrome 74) | |
| Nokia 9 PureView (Chrome 73.0.3683.90) | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=210, last 2 years) | |
| ZTE Axon 10 Pro (Chrome 74) | |
| OnePlus 7 (Chrome 74) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (17011 - 33918, n=21) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S10e (Chrome 73) | |
| Nokia 9 PureView (Chrome 73.0.3683.90) | |
| ZTE Axon 9 Pro (Chrome 71) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Nokia 9 PureView (Chrome 73.0.3683.90) | |
| ZTE Axon 9 Pro (Chrome 71) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S10e (Chrome 73) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (1852 - 2611, n=19) | |
| OnePlus 7 (Chrome 74) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75) | |
| ZTE Axon 10 Pro (Chrome 74) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=167, last 2 years) | |
* ... smaller is better
| ZTE Axon 10 Pro | ZTE Axon 9 Pro | OnePlus 7 | Nokia 9 PureView | Xiaomi Mi 9 | Samsung Galaxy S10e | Average 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -29% | 0% | -42% | -13% | -30% | -16% | 122% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 769 | 719 -7% | 1463 90% | 728 -5% | 666 -13% | 792 3% | 760 ? -1% | 1887 ? 145% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 503 | 196.4 -61% | 392 -22% | 200.3 -60% | 388.3 -23% | 194.1 -61% | 297 ? -41% | 1471 ? 192% |
| Random Read 4KB | 150.4 | 141.3 -6% | 175.3 17% | 132 -12% | 149.4 -1% | 136.9 -9% | 152.9 ? 2% | 278 ? 85% |
| Random Write 4KB | 189.5 | 22.52 -88% | 28.7 -85% | 20.18 -89% | 165.3 -13% | 24.1 -87% | 131.6 ? -31% | 311 ? 64% |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 88.2 ? | 85.4 ? -3% | 73.2 ? -17% | 76 ? -14% | ||||
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 66.8 ? | 61.6 ? -8% | 60.7 ? -9% | 59.6 ? -11% |
Arena of Valor
Shadow Fight 3
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 41.4 °C / 107 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 40.9 °C / 106 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.5 °C / 82 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
ZTE Axon 10 Pro audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 11% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 81% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 33% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 60% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
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, 7% similar, 84% 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%
| desligado |   0.01 / 0.22 Watt |
| Ocioso |  0.76 / 1.15 / 1.18 Watt |
| Carga |
3.95 / 7.49 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| ZTE Axon 10 Pro 4000 mAh | ZTE Axon 9 Pro 4000 mAh | OnePlus 7 3700 mAh | Nokia 9 PureView 3320 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 9 3300 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S10e 3100 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -17% | -10% | -68% | -5% | -16% | -29% | -36% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.76 | 0.86 -13% | 0.6 21% | 1.65 -117% | 0.67 12% | 0.6 21% | 0.939 ? -24% | 0.883 ? -16% |
| Idle Average * | 1.15 | 1.1 4% | 1.1 4% | 2.34 -103% | 1.26 -10% | 1.2 -4% | 1.506 ? -31% | 1.467 ? -28% |
| Idle Maximum * | 1.18 | 1.21 -3% | 2 -69% | 2.43 -106% | 1.29 -9% | 1.5 -27% | 1.799 ? -52% | 1.621 ? -37% |
| Load Average * | 3.95 | 5.02 -27% | 4 -1% | 5.02 -27% | 3.71 6% | 5.2 -32% | 4.61 ? -17% | 6.55 ? -66% |
| Load Maximum * | 7.49 | 10.82 -44% | 8 -7% | 6.51 13% | 9.3 -24% | 10.2 -36% | 9.04 ? -21% | 9.9 ? -32% |
* ... smaller is better
| ZTE Axon 10 Pro 4000 mAh | ZTE Axon 9 Pro 4000 mAh | OnePlus 7 3700 mAh | Nokia 9 PureView 3320 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 9 3300 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S10e 3100 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -3% | 13% | -26% | -13% | -32% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1927 | 1989 3% | 1250 -35% | 1650 -14% | 1185 -39% | |
| H.264 | 1068 | 933 -13% | 732 -31% | 1008 -6% | 795 -26% | |
| WiFi v1.3 | 680 | 661 -3% | 901 33% | 486 -29% | 546 -20% | 416 -39% |
| Load | 217 | 278 28% | 202 -7% | 194 -11% | 164 -24% |
Pro
Contra
O ZTE Axon 10 Pro pode competir com carros-chefe mais caros em muitos níveis. Tem excelente desempenho do sistema graças ao seu SoC Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 e 6 GB de RAM. Muitos OEMs também omitem a expansão do cartão microSD a esse preço, o que dá ao Axon 10 Pro uma vantagem, pois ele pode ler cartões de até 2 TB. O dispositivo também possui câmeras de boa qualidade, especialmente para tirar fotos em macro. No entanto, a ZTE não ajuda o Axon 10 Pro ao projetá-lo, parece quase indistinguível do Huawei P30 Pro.
O ZTE Axon 10 Pro é uma alternativa poderosa para outros carros-chefe mais caros. No entanto, não faz o suficiente para se diferenciar da concorrência, em nossa opinião. Pior ainda, parece um imitador.
O dispositivo também sofre de algumas deficiências irritantes. Embora gostemos do seu painel AMOLED por sua boa taxa de contraste e valor de preto, ele é comparativamente escuro pelos padrões de smartphone carros-chefe. Além disso, nossa unidade de análise esquenta muito para o nosso gosto sob uso intenso contínuo e pode se sentir desconfortável para algumas pessoas quando jogam.
No geral, o Axon 10 Pro é uma opção bem equipada e potente para séries emblemáticas mais estabelecidas. A ZTE incluiu NFC, carregamento sem fio e Wi-Fi rápido, todos os quais são bem-vindos. A empresa até desenvolveu uma variante 5G, embora o modelo 4G continue sendo o melhor valor, considerando o lançamento limitado de 5G no momento deste artigo.
ZTE Axon 10 Pro
- 08/31/2022 v7 (old)
Mike Wobker
Price comparison
