Smartphone tests - DXOMARK https://www.dxomark.com/category/smartphone-reviews/ The leading source of independent audio, display, battery and image quality measurements and ratings for smartphone, camera, lens, wireless speaker and laptop since 2008. Fri, 08 Mar 2024 15:32:17 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.3 https://www.dxomark.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/logo-o-transparent-150x150.png Smartphone tests - DXOMARK https://www.dxomark.com/category/smartphone-reviews/ 32 32 Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra Battery test https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s24-ultra-battery-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s24-ultra-battery-test/#respond Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:00:02 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=167901 We put the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra through our rigorous DXOMARK Battery test suite to measure its performance in autonomy, charging, and efficiency. In these test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases. Overview Key specifications: Battery capacity: 5000 mAh 45W charger (not included) [...]

The post Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra Battery test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra through our rigorous DXOMARK Battery test suite to measure its performance in autonomy, charging, and efficiency. In these test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview

Key specifications:

  • Battery capacity: 5000 mAh
  • 45W charger (not included)
  • 6.8-inch, 1440 x 3120, 120 Hz, OLED display
  • Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 (4 nm)
  • Tested ROM / RAM combination: 256 GB + 12 GB

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
130
battery
129
Autonomy
Home/Office
121

221

On the go
112

195

Calibrated
152

198

127
Charging
Full charge
127

224

Quick boost
127

212

139
Efficiency
Charge up
124

205

Discharge
147

194

Key performances

Charging Time
2 days 8h
Battery life
Charging Time
0h38
80% Charging time
Charging Time
1h27
Full charging time
Quick Boost
4h22 autonomy
after 5-minute charge
BATTERY
Position in Global Ranking
50th
1. Honor Magic6 Pro
157
2. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
152
3. Honor X7b
151
3. Oppo Find X6 Pro
151
5. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)
150
6. Honor X7a
147
6. Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
147
8. Oppo Reno6 5G
146
9. Realme GT Neo 2 5G
144
10. Honor X9a
143
11. Honor X9b
142
11. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
142
13. Honor Magic5 Pro
141
13. Oppo Reno8 5G
141
15. Asus ROG Phone 6
140
15. Sony Xperia 10 V
140
17. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
139
18. Huawei P60 Pro
138
18. Nubia RedMagic 8 Pro
138
18. Oppo A77 5G
138
18. Sony Xperia 10 IV
138
22. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
136
22. OnePlus Nord CE 5G
136
22. Samsung Galaxy M51
136
22. Vivo Y72 5G
136
22. Vivo X80 Lite 5G
136
22. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G
136
22. Xiaomi 11T
136
29. Asus ROG Phone 7
135
29. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G
135
29. Oppo Find X5 Lite
135
32. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
134
32. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
134
32. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G
134
32. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10
134
36. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
133
36. Oppo A74
133
36. Vivo Y76 5G
133
36. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
133
36. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G
133
36. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
133
42. Honor X8 5G
132
42. Oppo A78 5G
132
42. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G
132
42. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10S
132
46. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
131
46. POCO F5 Pro
131
46. Samsung Galaxy A72
131
46. Wiko Power U30
131
50. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
130
50. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
130
52. Realme GT Neo 3
129
52. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G
129
52. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
129
52. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G
129
52. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro
129
57. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
128
57. OnePlus Nord 2 5G
128
57. Xiaomi 13
128
60. Honor 90 Lite
127
60. Nubia RedMagic 6 Pro
127
60. Oppo A94 5G
127
63. Honor 70
126
63. OnePlus 10T 5G
126
63. Oppo Find X3 Neo
126
63. Xiaomi 13 Pro
126
63. Xiaomi 11T Pro
126
68. OnePlus 11
125
68. Samsung Galaxy A13 5G
125
70. Nothing Phone (2)
124
71. Huawei P50 Pro
123
71. TCL 40R 5G
123
71. Xiaomi 12T Pro
123
74. OnePlus 9
122
75. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
121
75. Oppo A74 5G
121
77. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 5G
120
77. Xiaomi 13T Pro
120
79. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
119
79. Nothing Phone(1)
119
79. Oppo A54 5G
119
79. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11
119
83. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
118
83. Motorola Edge 20 Pro
118
83. Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro
118
83. Xiaomi 12T
118
83. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G
118
88. Realme GT 2 Pro
117
88. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
117
90. Honor X7
116
90. Honor 90
116
90. Oppo Find X5 Pro
116
90. Vivo Y20s
116
94. Apple iPhone 13
115
94. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G
115
94. Realme GT 5G
115
97. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
114
97. Huawei P40 Lite
114
97. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
114
97. Xiaomi Mi 10T Pro 5G
114
97. Xiaomi 13T
114
102. Apple iPhone 15
113
102. Nokia G42 5G
113
102. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
113
102. Sony Xperia 5 IV
113
106. Apple iPhone 14
112
106. Motorola Moto G62 5G
112
106. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G
112
106. OnePlus 8T
112
110. Google Pixel 8 Pro
111
110. Motorola Moto G9 Power
111
110. Oppo Find X5
111
110. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
111
114. Wiko Power U20
110
115. Oppo Find X3 Lite
109
115. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
109
115. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
109
118. Honor Magic Vs
108
118. Oppo Find N2 Flip
108
118. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)
108
118. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
108
122. Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G
107
123. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
106
124. Black Shark 5 Pro
105
124. Oppo Find X3 Pro
105
126. OnePlus 9 Pro
104
127. Google Pixel 8
103
127. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
103
127. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
103
130. Asus Zenfone 8 Flip
102
130. Asus Zenfone 8
102
130. Google Pixel 7 Pro
102
133. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE
101
134. OnePlus 10 Pro
100
134. POCO F4 GT
100
134. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)
100
134. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022
100
134. Xiaomi 12
100
139. Apple iPhone 13 mini
99
139. Realme C21
99
139. Realme C11
99
139. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
99
139. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
99
144. Google Pixel 7
98
144. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
98
144. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
98
147. Google Pixel 6
97
148. Google Pixel 7a
96
148. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
96
148. Vivo X51 5G
96
151. Honor Magic4 Pro
95
151. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
95
151. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
95
151. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
95
151. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G
95
156. Google Pixel 6a
94
157. Apple iPhone 12 mini
93
157. Google Pixel 5
93
157. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
93
160. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
92
161. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
90
162. Google Pixel Fold
88
162. Xiaomi Redmi 9
88
164. Sony Xperia 1 IV
87
164. TCL 406
87
166. Apple iPhone SE (2022)
84
167. Fairphone 5
83
168. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
82
168. Xiaomi Mi 11
82
170. Google Pixel 6 Pro
81
171. Xiaomi 12 Pro
76
172. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
75
BATTERY
Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking
14th
1. Honor Magic6 Pro
157
2. Oppo Find X6 Pro
151
3. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
142
4. Honor Magic5 Pro
141
5. Asus ROG Phone 6
140
6. Huawei P60 Pro
138
7. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
136
8. Asus ROG Phone 7
135
9. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
134
9. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
134
11. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
133
11. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
133
13. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
131
14. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
130
15. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
128
16. Xiaomi 13 Pro
126
17. Huawei P50 Pro
123
18. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
121
19. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
119
20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
118
21. Oppo Find X5 Pro
116
22. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
114
22. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
114
24. Sony Xperia 5 IV
113
25. Google Pixel 8 Pro
111
25. Oppo Find X5
111
25. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
111
28. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
109
29. Honor Magic Vs
108
29. Oppo Find N2 Flip
108
29. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
108
32. Oppo Find X3 Pro
105
33. OnePlus 9 Pro
104
34. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
103
34. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
103
36. Google Pixel 7 Pro
102
37. OnePlus 10 Pro
100
38. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
99
38. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
99
40. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
98
41. Honor Magic4 Pro
95
41. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
95
41. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
95
44. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
93
45. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
92
46. Google Pixel Fold
88
47. Sony Xperia 1 IV
87
48. Google Pixel 6 Pro
81
49. Xiaomi 12 Pro
76

Pros

  • Low discharging currents in most test cases
  • Great autonomy in individual test cases
  • Excellent wired charger efficiency

Cons

  • Poor autonomy while using social apps outdoors
  • Relatively less autonomy regained from 5-minutes quick charging

The Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra offered a satisfying battery experience during our tests, ranking in the top half of our database. However, compared to its predecessor, the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra lost 12 points due to the weaker showing in autonomy and charging.

The Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra has a 5000 mAh battery, offering 56 hours of autonomy under moderate usage. The device performed impressively in individual test cases, especially when streaming videos, gaming, and idling with the screen on. However, the autonomy declined during our typical usage scenario and on-the-go tests, indicating that the device was not very well optimized.

The charging experience of Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra ranked slightly over the average among all our tested devices but still came behind the S23 Ultra (Snapdragon). The recommended 45W charger needed 1 hour and 27 minutes to fully charge the battery. The wireless charging duration of 2 hours and 9 minutes was also around the average. On the other hand, the device struggled in the five-minute quick charge test, which yielded only  4 hours and 22 minutes of additional autonomy.

The Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra’s charge-up efficiency was 75.7%, which is relatively less efficient when compared with other devices. However, the residual power drain was lower than average, regardless of whether the device was plugged in or not. The Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra’s discharging currents were also generally very low in our individual test cases.

Compared to other devices in the Ultra-Premium segment, the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra still had a good showing thanks to its autonomy and efficiency performance.

Test Summary

About DXOMARK Battery tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone battery reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective tests over a week-long period both indoors and outdoors. (See our introductory and how we test articles for more details about our smartphone Battery protocol.)

The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations under the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

Battery Charger Wireless Display Processor
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra 5000mAh 45W
(not included)		 15W Dynamic AMOLED 2X
1440 x 3120		 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3
Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra 5000mAh 45W
(not included)		 15W AMOLED
1440 x 3088		 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max 4441mAh 27W
(included)		 15W AMOLED Retina XDR
1290 x 2796		 Apple A17 Pro

Autonomy

129

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

195

Honor X7b
i
How Autonomy score is composed

Autonomy score is composed of three performance sub-scores: Home / Office, On the go, and Calibrated use cases. Each sub-score comprises the results of a comprehensive range of tests for measuring autonomy in all kinds of real-life scenarios.

Learn more about how we test battery
Light Usage
81h
Light Usage
Active: 2h30/day
Moderate Usage
56h
Moderate Usage
Active: 4h/day
Intense Usage
34h
Intense Usage
Active: 7h/day
BATTERY
Position in Global Ranking
Battery Life (moderate)
76th
1. Honor X7b
95h
2. Honor X7a
86h
3. Vivo Y72 5G
85h
4. Honor Magic6 Pro
81h
5. Honor X9b
81h
6. Wiko Power U30
80h
7. Sony Xperia 10 IV
80h
8. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)
77h
9. Oppo A77 5G
76h
10. Sony Xperia 10 V
75h
11. Honor X8 5G
74h
12. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
74h
13. Samsung Galaxy M51
73h
14. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G
72h
15. Asus ROG Phone 6
72h
16. Asus ROG Phone 7
72h
17. Honor X9a
72h
18. Wiko Power U20
71h
19. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 5G
70h
20. Oppo A78 5G
70h
21. Vivo Y20s
69h
22. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
69h
23. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10
69h
24. Samsung Galaxy A13 5G
69h
25. Samsung Galaxy A72
69h
26. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
68h
27. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro
67h
28. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
67h
29. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G
67h
30. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
66h
31. Honor Magic5 Pro
65h
32. Motorola Moto G62 5G
65h
33. Honor X7
65h
34. TCL 40R 5G
65h
35. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G
65h
36. Oppo A54 5G
65h
37. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
65h
38. Nokia G42 5G
64h
39. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
64h
40. OnePlus Nord CE 5G
64h
41. Vivo Y76 5G
64h
42. Oppo Find X6 Pro
64h
43. Oppo A74
64h
44. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
64h
45. Motorola Moto G9 Power
64h
46. Oppo A74 5G
63h
47. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
63h
48. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G
62h
49. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
62h
50. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G
62h
51. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10S
61h
52. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G
61h
53. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
61h
54. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
60h
55. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11
60h
56. Xiaomi 13 Pro
60h
57. Realme GT Neo 2 5G
60h
58. Nubia RedMagic 8 Pro
60h
59. Honor 90 Lite
60h
60. Xiaomi 11T
59h
61. TCL 406
59h
62. Vivo X80 Lite 5G
59h
63. Realme C11
59h
64. POCO F5 Pro
59h
65. Honor 70
58h
66. Oppo Find X5 Lite
58h
67. Oppo A94 5G
58h
68. Oppo Reno8 5G
58h
69. Huawei P60 Pro
57h
70. Realme C21
57h
71. Oppo Reno6 5G
57h
72. Sony Xperia 5 IV
57h
73. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022
57h
74. Honor 90
57h
75. Xiaomi 11T Pro
57h
76. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
56h
77. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
56h
78. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
56h
79. OnePlus 10T 5G
55h
80. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G
55h
81. Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
55h
82. Nothing Phone (2)
55h
83. Google Pixel 8 Pro
55h
84. Google Pixel 7a
55h
85. OnePlus Nord 2 5G
54h
86. Nothing Phone(1)
54h
87. OnePlus 9
54h
88. Xiaomi 13T
54h
89. Xiaomi 13
54h
90. Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G
54h
91. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
54h
92. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
54h
93. Xiaomi 12T Pro
54h
94. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
53h
95. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G
53h
96. Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro
53h
97. Honor Magic Vs
53h
98. Apple iPhone 14
53h
99. Apple iPhone 13
52h
100. Motorola Edge 20 Pro
52h
101. OnePlus 11
52h
102. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G
52h
103. Xiaomi 13T Pro
52h
104. Realme GT Neo 3
52h
105. Xiaomi 12T
52h
106. Google Pixel 7 Pro
52h
107. Realme GT 5G
52h
108. Huawei P50 Pro
51h
109. Oppo Find X3 Neo
51h
110. Xiaomi Mi 10T Pro 5G
51h
111. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
51h
111. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
51h
113. Apple iPhone 15
51h
114. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
51h
115. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
50h
116. Google Pixel 6a
50h
117. Huawei P40 Lite
50h
118. Realme GT 2 Pro
50h
119. Xiaomi Redmi 9
50h
120. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)
50h
121. Oppo Find N2 Flip
49h
122. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
49h
123. Asus Zenfone 8 Flip
49h
124. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G
49h
125. Oppo Find X5 Pro
49h
126. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G
49h
127. Google Pixel 7
49h
128. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
49h
129. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
49h
130. Google Pixel 8
49h
131. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
48h
132. Google Pixel 6
48h
133. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
48h
134. Oppo Find X5
48h
135. Google Pixel Fold
47h
136. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
47h
137. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
47h
138. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
47h
139. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE
47h
140. Sony Xperia 1 IV
47h
141. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
46h
142. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)
46h
143. Oppo Find X3 Lite
46h
144. Nubia RedMagic 6 Pro
46h
145. Xiaomi 12
45h
146. OnePlus 8T
45h
147. Asus Zenfone 8
45h
148. Google Pixel 5
44h
149. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
44h
150. Oppo Find X3 Pro
44h
151. OnePlus 10 Pro
43h
152. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
43h
153. OnePlus 9 Pro
43h
154. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
43h
155. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
42h
156. Google Pixel 6 Pro
41h
157. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
41h
158. Black Shark 5 Pro
41h
159. Apple iPhone 13 mini
41h
160. Apple iPhone 12 mini
40h
161. POCO F4 GT
40h
162. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
40h
163. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
39h
164. Honor Magic4 Pro
39h
165. Vivo X51 5G
38h
166. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
38h
167. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
38h
168. Fairphone 5
37h
169. Apple iPhone SE (2022)
37h
170. Xiaomi Mi 11
36h
171. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
35h
172. Xiaomi 12 Pro
34h
BATTERY
Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking
Battery Life (moderate)
16th
1. Honor Magic6 Pro
81h
2. Asus ROG Phone 6
72h
3. Asus ROG Phone 7
72h
4. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
69h
5. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
68h
6. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
67h
7. Honor Magic5 Pro
65h
8. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
65h
9. Oppo Find X6 Pro
64h
10. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
64h
11. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
63h
12. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
61h
13. Xiaomi 13 Pro
60h
14. Huawei P60 Pro
57h
15. Sony Xperia 5 IV
57h
16. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
56h
17. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
56h
18. Google Pixel 8 Pro
55h
19. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
54h
20. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
54h
21. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
53h
22. Honor Magic Vs
53h
23. Google Pixel 7 Pro
52h
24. Huawei P50 Pro
51h
25. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
51h
26. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
50h
27. Oppo Find N2 Flip
49h
28. Oppo Find X5 Pro
49h
29. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
49h
30. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
49h
31. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
48h
32. Oppo Find X5
48h
33. Google Pixel Fold
47h
34. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
47h
35. Sony Xperia 1 IV
47h
36. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
46h
37. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
44h
38. Oppo Find X3 Pro
44h
39. OnePlus 10 Pro
43h
40. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
43h
41. OnePlus 9 Pro
43h
42. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
43h
43. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
42h
44. Google Pixel 6 Pro
41h
45. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
41h
46. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
40h
47. Honor Magic4 Pro
39h
48. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
38h
49. Xiaomi 12 Pro
34h

Home/Office

121

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

221

Honor X7b
i

A robot housed in a Faraday cage performs a set of touch-based user actions during what we call our “typical usage scenario” (TUS) — making calls, video streaming, etc. — 4 hours of active use over the course of a 16-hour period, plus 8 hours of “sleep.” The robot repeats this set of actions every day until the device runs out of power.

Typical Usage Scenario discharge curves

On the go

112

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

195

Samsung Galaxy M51
i

Using a smartphone on the go takes a toll on autonomy because of extra “hidden” demands, such as the continuous signaling associated with cellphone network selection, for example. DXOMARK Battery experts take the phone outdoors and perform a precisely defined set of activities while following the same three-hour travel itinerary (walking, taking the bus, the subway…) for each device

Autonomy for on the go use cases (full charge)

Calibrated

152

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

198

Samsung Galaxy M51
i

For this series of tests, the smartphone returns to the Faraday cage and our robots repeatedly perform actions linked to one specific use case (such as gaming, video streaming, etc.) at a time. Starting from an 80% charge, all devices are tested until they have expended at least 5% of their battery power.

Autonomy for calibrated use cases (full charge)

Charging

127

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

218

Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
i
How Charging score is composed

Charging is fully part of the overall battery experience. In some situations where autonomy is at a minimum, knowing how fast you can charge becomes a concern. The DXOMARK Battery charging score is composed of two sub-scores, (1) Full charge and (2) Quick boost.

Learn more about how we test battery
Wired
Wired
69%
in 30 min
0h38
0 - 80%
1h27
Full charge
Wireless
Wireless
24%
in 30 min
1h37
0 - 80%
2h09
Full charge

Full charge

127

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

224

Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
i

Full charge tests assess the reliability of the battery power gauge; measure how long and how much power the battery takes to charge from zero to 80% capacity, from 80 to 100% as shown by the UI, and until an actual full charge.

BATTERY
Position in Global Ranking
Charging Time 0-80%
66th
1. Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
0h08
2. Black Shark 5 Pro
0h13
3. Realme GT Neo 3
0h14
4. Nubia RedMagic 6 Pro
0h14
5. OnePlus 10T 5G
0h16
6. POCO F4 GT
0h17
7. OnePlus 11
0h18
8. Xiaomi 11T Pro
0h18
9. Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro
0h19
10. Oppo Reno8 5G
0h21
11. Realme GT 5G
0h21
12. Xiaomi 12 Pro
0h21
13. OnePlus 9
0h21
14. Oppo Reno6 5G
0h22
15. Xiaomi 12T Pro
0h22
16. OnePlus 9 Pro
0h22
17. Honor Magic4 Pro
0h22
18. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G
0h22
19. OnePlus Nord 2 5G
0h22
20. Oppo Find X5 Lite
0h22
21. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
0h22
22. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G
0h23
23. Oppo Find X3 Pro
0h23
24. Oppo Find X3 Neo
0h23
25. Xiaomi 13 Pro
0h23
26. Oppo Find X5 Pro
0h23
27. Oppo Find X6 Pro
0h24
28. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G
0h24
29. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
0h24
30. Oppo Find X5
0h25
31. OnePlus 8T
0h25
32. Xiaomi 12T
0h25
33. Realme GT Neo 2 5G
0h25
34. Oppo Find X3 Lite
0h26
35. Realme GT 2 Pro
0h26
36. OnePlus 10 Pro
0h26
37. Xiaomi 12
0h27
38. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
0h28
39. Nubia RedMagic 8 Pro
0h28
40. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
0h28
41. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G
0h28
42. Xiaomi 13
0h29
43. Honor Magic6 Pro
0h29
44. Huawei P60 Pro
0h29
45. Honor Magic Vs
0h29
46. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G
0h29
47. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
0h29
48. Xiaomi 13T Pro
0h30
49. Xiaomi 11T
0h30
50. Huawei P50 Pro
0h30
51. Xiaomi Mi 11
0h31
52. POCO F5 Pro
0h32
53. Honor 70
0h32
54. Nothing Phone (2)
0h32
55. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G
0h33
56. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
0h34
57. Huawei P40 Lite
0h34
58. Xiaomi 13T
0h35
59. Asus ROG Phone 6
0h35
60. Honor 90
0h35
61. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
0h37
62. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
0h37
63. Honor Magic5 Pro
0h37
64. Asus ROG Phone 7
0h37
65. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
0h37
66. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
0h38
67. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G
0h38
68. Oppo A94 5G
0h39
69. Vivo Y76 5G
0h39
70. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
0h39
71. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
0h40
72. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
0h40
73. Vivo X51 5G
0h41
74. Vivo X80 Lite 5G
0h42
75. OnePlus Nord CE 5G
0h42
76. Motorola Edge 20 Pro
0h43
77. Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G
0h43
78. Xiaomi Mi 10T Pro 5G
0h43
79. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
0h44
80. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G
0h44
81. Oppo Find N2 Flip
0h45
82. Asus Zenfone 8
0h45
83. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
0h46
84. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
0h46
85. Nothing Phone(1)
0h47
85. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)
0h47
87. Google Pixel 8
0h48
88. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
0h48
89. Oppo A74
0h48
90. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)
0h48
91. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)
0h49
92. Google Pixel 8 Pro
0h49
93. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11
0h49
94. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE
0h49
95. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
0h49
96. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
0h49
97. Oppo A78 5G
0h49
98. Oppo A77 5G
0h50
99. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
0h50
99. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
0h50
101. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
0h51
102. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
0h51
103. Honor 90 Lite
0h51
104. Apple iPhone SE (2022)
0h51
104. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G
0h51
106. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
0h51
107. Apple iPhone 12 mini
0h52
108. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10
0h52
109. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10S
0h52
110. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
0h52
111. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
0h52
112. Honor X9a
0h53
113. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
0h53
114. Apple iPhone 14
0h54
115. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
0h54
116. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G
0h54
116. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
0h54
118. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
0h54
119. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro
0h55
120. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
0h56
121. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
0h56
122. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
0h57
123. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
0h57
124. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
0h57
125. Apple iPhone 13 mini
0h57
126. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
0h57
127. Samsung Galaxy A72
0h58
128. Apple iPhone 13
0h58
129. Google Pixel Fold
1h00
130. Google Pixel 7
1h00
131. Honor X9b
1h01
132. Asus Zenfone 8 Flip
1h01
133. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
1h01
134. Honor X8 5G
1h02
135. Apple iPhone 15
1h02
136. Google Pixel 6 Pro
1h02
137. Google Pixel 6
1h03
137. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
1h03
139. Google Pixel 7 Pro
1h03
140. Honor X7
1h05
141. Sony Xperia 1 IV
1h05
142. Sony Xperia 5 IV
1h05
143. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
1h06
144. Fairphone 5
1h07
145. Google Pixel 7a
1h07
146. Honor X7b
1h08
147. Honor X7a
1h10
148. Google Pixel 6a
1h11
149. Google Pixel 5
1h14
150. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
1h15
151. Vivo Y72 5G
1h18
152. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G
1h20
153. Oppo A74 5G
1h21
154. Sony Xperia 10 V
1h22
155. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 5G
1h22
156. Samsung Galaxy M51
1h23
157. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022
1h25
158. TCL 40R 5G
1h25
159. Vivo Y20s
1h25
160. Motorola Moto G62 5G
1h26
161. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
1h28
162. Samsung Galaxy A13 5G
1h30
163. Nokia G42 5G
1h33
164. Sony Xperia 10 IV
1h45
165. Wiko Power U30
1h47
166. Realme C21
1h50
167. Oppo A54 5G
1h51
168. Xiaomi Redmi 9
1h52
169. Motorola Moto G9 Power
1h53
170. Realme C11
1h56
171. TCL 406
2h02
172. Wiko Power U20
2h22
BATTERY
Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking
Charging Time 0-80%
24th
1. Xiaomi 12 Pro
0h21
2. Honor Magic4 Pro
0h22
3. OnePlus 9 Pro
0h22
4. Oppo Find X3 Pro
0h23
5. Xiaomi 13 Pro
0h23
6. Oppo Find X5 Pro
0h23
7. Oppo Find X6 Pro
0h24
8. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
0h24
9. Oppo Find X5
0h25
10. OnePlus 10 Pro
0h26
11. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
0h28
12. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
0h28
13. Honor Magic6 Pro
0h29
14. Huawei P60 Pro
0h29
15. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
0h29
16. Honor Magic Vs
0h29
17. Huawei P50 Pro
0h30
18. Asus ROG Phone 6
0h35
19. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
0h37
20. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
0h37
21. Honor Magic5 Pro
0h37
22. Asus ROG Phone 7
0h37
23. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
0h37
24. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
0h38
25. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
0h39
26. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
0h40
27. Oppo Find N2 Flip
0h45
28. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
0h46
29. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
0h48
30. Google Pixel 8 Pro
0h49
31. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
0h49
32. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
0h51
33. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
0h51
34. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
0h52
35. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
0h54
36. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
0h54
37. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
0h56
38. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
0h56
39. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
0h57
40. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
0h57
41. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
0h57
42. Google Pixel Fold
1h00
43. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
1h01
44. Google Pixel 6 Pro
1h02
45. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
1h03
46. Google Pixel 7 Pro
1h03
47. Sony Xperia 1 IV
1h05
48. Sony Xperia 5 IV
1h05
49. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
1h06
Power consumption and battery level during full charge
The charging curves, in wired and wireless (if available) showing the evolution of the battery level indicator as well as the power consumption in watts during the stages of charging toward full capacity.
Power consumption and battery level during wireless full charge
The charging curves, in wired and wireless (if available) showing the evolution of the battery level indicator as well as the power consumption in watts during the stages of charging toward full capacity.
Time to full charge
Time to full charge

Quick boost

127

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

212

Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
i

With the phone at different charge levels (20%, 40%, 60%, 80%), Quick boost tests measure the amount of charge the battery receives after being plugged in for 5 minutes. The chart here compares the average autonomy gain from a quick 5-minute charge.

Average autonomy gain for a 5 minute charge (wired)

Efficiency

139

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

154

Oppo Reno6 5G
i
How Efficiency score is composed

The DXOMARK power efficiency score consists of two sub-scores, Charge up and Discharge rate, both of which combine data obtained during robot-based typical usage scenario, calibrated tests and charging evaluation, taking into consideration the device’s battery capacity. DXOMARK calculate the annual power consumption of the product, shown on below graph, which is representative of the overall efficiency during a charge and when in use.

Learn more about how we test battery
Annual Consumption Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
4.6 kWh
Efficient
Good
Bad
Inefficient

Charge up

124

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

205

Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro
i

The charge up sub-score is a combination of four factors: the overall efficiency of a full charge, related to how much energy you need to fill up the battery compared to the energy that the battery can provide; the efficiency of the travel adapter when it comes to transferring power from an outlet to your phone; the residual consumption when your phone is fully charged and still plugged into the charger; and the residual consumption of the charger itself, when the smartphone is disconnected from it. The chart here below shows the overall efficiency of a full charge in %.

Overall charge efficiency

Discharge

147

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

194

Apple iPhone 14 Pro
i

The discharge subscore rates the speed of a battery’s discharge during a test, which is independent of the battery’s capacity. It is the ratio of a battery’s capacity divided by its autonomy. A small-capacity battery could have the same autonomy as a large-capacity battery, indicating that the device is well-optimized, with a low discharge rate.

Average discharge current

The post Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra Battery test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s24-ultra-battery-test/feed/ 0 Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra Charging Time Charging Time Charging Time Quick Boost BATTERY BATTERY Light Usage Moderate Usage Intense Usage BATTERY BATTERY Wired Wireless BATTERY BATTERY Wired Wireless Wired Wireless Honor Magic V2 Display test https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic-v2-display-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic-v2-display-test/#respond Tue, 05 Mar 2024 22:01:01 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=167502&preview=true&preview_id=167502 We put the Honor Magic V2 through our rigorous DXOMARK Display test suite to measure its performance across six criteria. In this test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases. Overview Key display specifications: 7.92 inches OLED (~89.8% screen-to-body ratio) Resolution: 2156 x 2344 [...]

The post Honor Magic V2 Display test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Honor Magic V2 through our rigorous DXOMARK Display test suite to measure its performance across six criteria. In this test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview

Key display specifications:

  • 7.92 inches OLED (~89.8% screen-to-body ratio)
  • Resolution: 2156 x 2344 pixels, (~402 ppi density)
  • Aspect ratio: 9.78:9
  • Refresh rate: 120 Hz

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Honor Magic V2 Honor Magic V2
151
display
Readability
149

163

Color
157

164

Video
138

162

Motion
146

159

Touch
165

170

Artifacts
160

163

DISPLAY
Position in Global Ranking
8th
1. Honor Magic6 Pro
157
2. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
155
3. Google Pixel 8 Pro
154
3. Google Pixel 8
154
3. Samsung Galaxy S24+
154
3. Samsung Galaxy S24
154
7. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
152
8. Google Pixel Fold
151
8. Honor Magic V2
151
8. Honor Magic5 Pro
151
11. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
149
11. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
149
11. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
149
11. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
149
11. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
149
16. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
148
16. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
148
18. OnePlus Open
147
19. Google Pixel 7 Pro
146
19. Huawei P60 Pro
146
19. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
146
22. Apple iPhone 15
145
22. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
145
24. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
144
24. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
144
26. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
141
27. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
140
27. Google Pixel 7a
140
27. Google Pixel 7
140
27. Honor Magic4 Ultimate
140
27. Honor 90
140
27. Oppo Find X6 Pro
140
27. Vivo X Fold
140
34. Apple iPhone 14
139
34. Asus ROG Phone 7
139
34. Honor Magic Vs
139
34. Oppo Find X5 Pro
139
34. Xiaomi Mix Fold 3
139
39. Oppo Find X5
138
40. Apple iPhone 13
136
40. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
136
40. Xiaomi 13 Pro
136
43. Huawei P50 Pro
135
43. Nothing Phone (2)
135
43. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
135
43. Vivo X90 Pro+
135
43. Xiaomi 13
135
48. Asus Zenfone 10
134
48. Oppo Find X6
134
48. Oppo Find N2
134
48. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
134
48. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
134
48. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)
134
54. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
133
54. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
133
54. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
133
54. Vivo X90 Pro
133
54. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
133
54. Xiaomi 14
133
60. Vivo X70 Pro+
132
61. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
131
61. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
131
61. Sony Xperia 5 IV
131
61. Xiaomi 12T
131
65. Apple iPhone 13 mini
130
65. Google Pixel 6 Pro
130
65. Honor Magic4 Pro
130
65. Oppo Find N2 Flip
130
65. Realme GT 2 Pro
130
65. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
130
65. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
130
72. OnePlus 11
129
72. OnePlus 10 Pro
129
72. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
129
72. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
129
72. TCL 20 Pro 5G
129
72. Vivo X60 Pro+
129
72. Xiaomi 13T Pro
129
72. Xiaomi 13T
129
72. Xiaomi 11T
129
81. Asus ROG Phone 6
128
81. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G
128
81. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE
128
81. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
128
81. Sony Xperia 5 V
128
86. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
127
86. OnePlus 9 Pro
127
86. OnePlus 8T
127
86. Xiaomi 12T Pro
127
90. Oppo Find X3 Pro
126
90. Sony Xperia 1 IV
126
90. Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
126
93. Google Pixel 6a
125
93. Google Pixel 6
125
93. LG Wing
125
93. OnePlus 9
125
93. OnePlus 8 Pro
125
93. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)
125
93. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
125
93. Vivo iQOO 9 Pro
125
93. Xiaomi 12S Ultra
125
93. Xiaomi 11T Pro
125
103. Honor 70
124
103. Oppo Reno8 5G
124
103. Oppo Find N
124
103. Sony Xperia 5 III
124
103. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
124
103. Xiaomi Mi 11
124
109. Apple iPhone 12 Pro
123
109. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
123
109. Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
123
109. Vivo X51 5G
123
109. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G
123
114. Apple iPhone SE (2022)
122
114. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
122
114. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G
122
114. Oppo Find X3 Neo
122
114. Sony Xperia 1 III
122
114. Xiaomi 12 Pro
122
120. Apple iPhone 12
120
120. Huawei P40 Pro
120
120. Nothing Phone(1)
120
120. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
120
124. Motorola Edge 40 Pro
118
124. Realme GT 5G
118
124. Xiaomi 12
118
127. Motorola Razr 40 Ultra
117
127. Oppo Reno5 Pro+ 5G
117
127. Vivo iQOO 7 Legend
117
127. Xiaomi Mi 11i
117
131. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
116
131. Asus ROG Phone 5
116
133. Oppo Reno5 Pro 5G
114
134. Asus Zenfone 8
113
135. Oppo Reno6 5G
112
136. Motorola Edge 20 Pro
111
136. Oppo Find X3 Lite
111
136. Realme GT Neo 2 5G
111
136. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
111
140. Fairphone 5
110
140. Oppo Find X5 Lite
110
140. Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G
110
143. Lenovo Legion Y90
109
143. OnePlus Nord 2 5G
109
145. Sony Xperia 5 II
108
146. POCO F4 GT
107
146. Xiaomi Redmi K50 Gaming
107
148. Nubia RedMagic 6 Pro
105
149. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
104
149. Sony Xperia 10 V
104
149. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra
104
152. Oppo Find X2 Pro
103
153. Google Pixel 5
101
154. Google Pixel 4 XL
100
154. Sony Xperia 10 IV
100
156. Microsoft Surface Duo
99
157. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
98
158. Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro
97
159. Black Shark 4S Pro
95
159. Black Shark 4 Pro
95
159. Xiaomi Mi 10T Pro 5G
95
162. Black Shark 5 Pro
94
162. Vivo X80 Lite 5G
94
164. Asus ROG Phone 3
92
165. Fairphone 4
87
166. Crosscall Action-X5
77
167. Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
74
168. Xiaomi Black Shark 3 Pro
69
169. Nokia 8.3 5G
65
170. Lenovo Legion Phone 2 Pro
60
171. Samsung Galaxy A12
53
172. Realme C21
52
DISPLAY
Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking
6th
1. Honor Magic6 Pro
157
2. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
155
3. Google Pixel 8 Pro
154
3. Samsung Galaxy S24+
154
5. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
152
6. Google Pixel Fold
151
6. Honor Magic V2
151
6. Honor Magic5 Pro
151
9. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
149
9. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
149
9. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
149
9. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
149
9. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
149
14. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
148
15. OnePlus Open
147
16. Google Pixel 7 Pro
146
16. Huawei P60 Pro
146
16. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
146
19. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
145
20. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
144
20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
144
22. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
141
23. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
140
23. Honor Magic4 Ultimate
140
23. Oppo Find X6 Pro
140
23. Vivo X Fold
140
27. Asus ROG Phone 7
139
27. Honor Magic Vs
139
27. Oppo Find X5 Pro
139
27. Xiaomi Mix Fold 3
139
31. Oppo Find X5
138
32. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
136
32. Xiaomi 13 Pro
136
34. Huawei P50 Pro
135
34. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
135
34. Vivo X90 Pro+
135
37. Oppo Find X6
134
37. Oppo Find N2
134
37. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
134
37. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
134
37. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)
134
42. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
133
42. Vivo X90 Pro
133
42. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
133
45. Vivo X70 Pro+
132
46. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
131
46. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
131
46. Sony Xperia 5 IV
131
49. Google Pixel 6 Pro
130
49. Honor Magic4 Pro
130
49. Oppo Find N2 Flip
130
49. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
130
53. OnePlus 10 Pro
129
53. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
129
53. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
129
53. Vivo X60 Pro+
129
57. Asus ROG Phone 6
128
57. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G
128
57. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
128
57. Sony Xperia 5 V
128
61. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
127
61. OnePlus 9 Pro
127
63. Oppo Find X3 Pro
126
63. Sony Xperia 1 IV
126
63. Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
126
66. LG Wing
125
66. OnePlus 8 Pro
125
66. Xiaomi 12S Ultra
125
69. Oppo Find N
124
69. Sony Xperia 5 III
124
69. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
124
72. Apple iPhone 12 Pro
123
72. Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
123
74. Sony Xperia 1 III
122
74. Xiaomi 12 Pro
122
76. Huawei P40 Pro
120
77. Motorola Edge 40 Pro
118
78. Motorola Razr 40 Ultra
117
79. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
116
80. Sony Xperia 5 II
108
81. Oppo Find X2 Pro
103
82. Google Pixel 4 XL
100
83. Microsoft Surface Duo
99
84. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
98
85. Asus ROG Phone 3
92
86. Xiaomi Black Shark 3 Pro
69

Pros

  • Anti-reflective film that improves screen readability
  • Well-managed frame drops when playing video games
  • Smooth display reaction in every use case

Cons

  • Lack of readability under sunlight
  • Color rendering appears unnatural in outdoor conditions.
  • Lack of uniformity in brightness and color

The Honor Magic V2 achieved a very high score in its display tests thanks to big improvements over its predecessor the Magic Vs in all attributes, especially video and touch.

The unfolded screen’s readability benefited from the anti-reflective film, especially when used outdoors. The film’s effectiveness on most light wavelengths as well as the screen’s lack of flicker lifted the device’s artifacts score close to the top. The Magic V2’s peak brightness, however, was measured at 950 nits, lower than the 2500 nits advertised, and was even a bit lower than the Magic Vs. The gamma was also better on the Magic V2 because the rendering under sunlight was a bit more natural.

The device provided a very satisfying video-watching experience thanks to the screen’s brightness for HDR10 video as well as the display’s color fidelity.

The Honor Magic V2 screen’s refresh rate has increased to 120 Hz, up from the already good 90 Hz of the Magic Vs. In addition, the display’s touch interactions were very accurate and smooth.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Display tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone and other display reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective and perceptual tests under controlled lab and real-life conditions. Note that we evaluate display attributes using only the device’s built-in display hardware and its still image (gallery) and video apps at their default settings. (For in-depth information about how we evaluate smartphone and other displays, check out our articles, “How DXOMARK tests display quality” and “A closer look at DXOMARK Display testing.”

The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations under the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

Readability

149

Honor Magic V2

163

Samsung Galaxy S24+
i
How Display Readability score is composed

Readability evaluates how easily and comfortably users can read still content (photos & web) on the display under different real-life conditions. DXOMARK uses its Display Bench to recreate ambient light conditions ranging from total darkness to bright sunlight. In addition to laboratory tests, perceptual analysis is also made in real-life environments.

Learn more about how we test display readability
Luminance under various lighting conditions
Contrast under various lighting conditions


Readability in an indoor (1000 lux) environment
From left to right: Honor Magic V2, Honor Magic Vs, OnePlus Open, Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
(Photos for illustration only)


Readability in an outdoor (20 000 lux) environment
From left to right: Honor Magic V2, Honor Magic Vs, OnePlus Open, Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
(Photos for illustration only)

Luminance uniformity measurement
This graph shows the uniformity of the display with a 20% gray pattern. The more visible the green color, the more uniform the display.

Color

157

Honor Magic V2

164

Google Pixel 8 Pro
i
How Display Color score is composed

The color attribute evaluates the capacity of the device to accurately reproduce colors. The measurements taken are for fidelity, white point color, and gamut coverage. We perform color evaluations for different lighting conditions to see how well the device can manage color in the surrounding environment. Colors are measured using a spectrophotometer in a controlled lighting environment. Perceptual analysis of color rendering is against the reference pattern displayed on a calibrated professional monitor.

Learn more about how we test display color
White point under D65 illuminant at 1000 lux


Color rendering indoors (1000 lux)
Clockwise from top left: Honor Magic V2, Honor Magic Vs, OnePlus Open, Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
(Photos for illustration only)


Color rendering outdoors (20 000 lux)
Clockwise from top left: Honor Magic V2, Honor Magic Vs, OnePlus Open, Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
(Photos for illustration only)

Color fidelity measurements
Honor Magic V2, color fidelity at 1000 lux in the sRGB color space
Honor Magic V2, color fidelity at 1000 lux in the Display-P3 color space
Each arrow represents the color difference between a target color pattern (base of the arrow) and its actual measurement (tip of the arrow). The longer the arrow, the more visible the color difference is. If the arrow stays within the circle, the color difference will be visible only to trained eyes.
Color behavior on angle
This graph shows the color shift when the screen is at an angle. Each dot represents a measurement at a particular angle. Dots inside the inner circle exhibit no color shift in angle; those between the inner and outer circle have shifts that only trained experts will see; but those falling outside the outer circle are noticeable.

Video

138

Honor Magic V2

162

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
i
How Display Video score is composed

Our video attribute evaluates the Standard Dynamic Range (SDR) and High Dynamic Range (HDR10) video handling of each device in indoor and low-light conditions. We measure tone mapping, color gamut, brightness and contrast of the display. We perform perceptual analysis against our professional reference monitor (Sony BVM-HX310) to ensure that the rendering respects the artistic intent.

Learn more about how we test display video
Video brightness at 10% APL in the dark ( < 5 lux)


Video rendering in a low-light (0 lux) environment
Clockwise from top left: Honor Magic V2, Honor Magic Vs, OnePlus Open, Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
(Photos for illustration only)

Gamut coverage for video content
HDR10 Gamut coverage
SDR Gamut coverage
The primary colors are measured both in HDR10 and SDR. The extracted color gamut shows the extent of the color area that the device can render. To respect the artistic intent, the measured gamut should match the master color space of each video.

Motion

146

Honor Magic V2

159

Honor Magic6 Pro
i
How Display Motion score is composed

The motion attribute evaluates the handling of dynamic contents. Frame drops, motion blur, and playback artifacts are scrutinized using games and videos.

Learn more about how we test display motion


Video frame drops
30 fps content
60 fps content
These long exposure photos present the number of frame irregularities in a 30-second video. A good performance shows a regular pattern (either a flat gray image or a pull-down pattern).

Touch

165

Honor Magic V2

170

Samsung Galaxy S24+
i
How Display Touch score is composed

To evaluate touch, DXOMARK uses a touch robot and a high-speed camera to play and record a set of scenarios for smoothness, accuracy and response-time evaluation.

Learn more about how we test display touch
Average Touch Response Time Honor Magic V2
86 ms
Fast
Good
Bad
Slow
This response time test evaluates precisely the time elapsed between a single touch of the robot on the screen and the displayed action. This test is applied to activities that require a high reactivity, such as gaming.

Artifacts

160

Honor Magic V2

163

OnePlus Open
i
How Display Artifacts score is composed

Evaluating artifacts means checking for the performance, image rendering and motion flaws that can affect the end-user experience. DXOMARK measures precisely the device’s reflectance and the presence of flicker, and assesses the impact of residual aliasing when playing video games, among other characteristics.

Learn more about how we test display motion
Average Reflectance (SCI) Honor Magic V2
1.3 %
Low
Good
Bad
High
Reflectance (SCI)
Measurements above show the reflection of the device within the visible spectrum range (400 nm to 700 nm). It includes both diffuse and specular reflection.
Flicker Frequency Honor Magic V2
90 Hz
Bad
Good
Bad
Great
Temporal Light Modulation
This graph represents the frequencies of lighting variation; the highest peak gives the main flicker frequency.
Aliasing (closeup)
Honor Magic V2

Honor Magic V2 – Crop
Honor Magic V2 – Crop 2
Honor Magic V2 – Crop 3

The post Honor Magic V2 Display test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic-v2-display-test/feed/ 0 Honor Magic V2 DISPLAY DISPLAY Honor_Magic_V2_readability_indoor Honor_Magic_V2_readability_shade Honor_Magic_V2_readability_uniformity Honor_Magic_V2_White_Point_CCT_vs_Ambient Honor_Magic_V2_color_indoor Honor_Magic_V2_color_shade Honor_Magic_V2_Color_Fidelity_Still_sRGB_1000lux_Zoom Honor_Magic_V2_Color_Fidelity_Still_P3_1000lux_Zoom Honor_Magic_V2_Scatter_Cono_White_P3_Zoom Honor_Magic_V2_video_lowlight_1 Honor_Magic_V2_Gamut_Video_HDR10 Honor_Magic_V2_Gamut_Video_SDR Honor_Magic_V2_motion_framedrops_fps_1 Honor_Magic_V2_motion_framedrops_fps_2 740_Aliasing Honor_Magic_V2_artifacts_aliasing_crops_dut_1 Honor_Magic_V2_artifacts_aliasing_crops_dut_2 Honor_Magic_V2_artifacts_aliasing_crops_dut_3 Xiaomi 14 Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-14-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-14-camera-test/#respond Tue, 27 Feb 2024 15:55:07 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=165977&preview=true&preview_id=165977 We put the Xiaomi 14  through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our [...]

The post Xiaomi 14 Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Xiaomi 14  through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary:50MP 1/1.31″ sensor, 23mm equivalent, f/1.6 aperture lens,  AF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 50MP,14 mm equivalent focal length, f/2.2 aperture lens, 115°
  • Tele : 50MP, 75mm equivalent, f/2.0 aperture lens, AF, OIS

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Xiaomi 14
Xiaomi 14
138
camera
137
Photo
Exposure
106

123

Color
105

125

Autofocus
90

123

Texture
110

124

Noise
109

116

Artifacts
70

82

55
Bokeh
Bokeh
55

80

73
Preview
Preview
73

91

134
Zoom
Tele
106

118

Wide
86

121

138
Video
Exposure
100

116

Color
108

119

Autofocus
100

119

Texture
114

118

Noise
107

119

Artifacts
78

86

Stabilization
110

118

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

BEST 175

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 160

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 132

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 149

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

CAMERA
Position in Global Ranking
28th
1. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+
157
2. Huawei P60 Pro
156
3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
154
3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
154
5. Google Pixel 8 Pro
153
5. Oppo Find X6 Pro
153
7. Honor Magic5 Pro
152
8. Oppo Find X6
150
8. Vivo X100 Pro
150
10. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
149
11. Google Pixel 8
148
12. Google Pixel 7 Pro
147
12. Honor Magic4 Ultimate
147
14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
146
14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
146
16. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
145
16. Apple iPhone 15
145
18. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
144
19. Huawei P50 Pro
143
20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
141
20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
141
20. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
141
23. Google Pixel 7
140
23. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
140
23. Vivo X90 Pro+
140
23. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
140
27. Huawei Mate 40 Pro+
139
28. Xiaomi 14
138
29. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
137
30. Vivo X90 Pro
136
30. Xiaomi 13 Pro
136
30. Xiaomi 12S Ultra
136
33. Huawei Mate 40 Pro
135
33. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
135
33. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)
135
36. Google Pixel 6 Pro
134
36. Vivo X70 Pro+
134
38. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
133
38. Apple iPhone 14
133
38. Google Pixel Fold
133
38. Google Pixel 7a
133
38. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
133
38. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
133
44. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
131
44. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
131
44. Xiaomi 13T Pro
131
47. Motorola Edge 40 Pro
130
47. Oppo Find X5 Pro
130
47. Xiaomi 13
130
50. Huawei P40 Pro
129
50. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
129
50. Xiaomi 12T Pro
129
50. Xiaomi 12 Pro
129
54. Oppo Find X3 Pro
128
54. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
128
56. Apple iPhone 12 Pro
127
56. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders
127
56. OnePlus 11
127
56. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
127
56. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE
127
61. Google Pixel 6
126
61. Honor Magic4 Pro
126
61. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)
126
61. Vivo X60 Pro+
126
65. Apple iPhone 13 mini
125
65. Apple iPhone 13
125
65. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
125
65. Vivo X50 Pro+
125
69. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
124
69. Xiaomi Mi 11 Pro
124
71. Xiaomi 13T
123
72. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
122
72. Google Pixel 6a
122
72. Honor 90
122
72. OnePlus 10 Pro
122
72. OnePlus 9 Pro
122
77. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G
121
78. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
120
78. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
120
78. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro 5G
120
81. Honor Magic Vs
119
81. Sony Xperia 5 IV
119
83. Sony Xperia 5 V
118
83. Sony Xperia 1 IV
118
85. Apple iPhone 12 mini
117
85. Apple iPhone 12
117
85. Honor Magic V2
117
85. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
117
85. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
117
85. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)
117
91. Apple iPhone 11
116
91. Asus Zenfone 8
116
91. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
116
94. Honor 70
115
94. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Snapdragon)
115
94. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
115
94. Xiaomi 12T
115
98. Nothing Phone(1)
114
98. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G
114
98. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G
114
98. Oppo Find X5
114
98. Oppo Find N2 Flip
114
103. OnePlus 8 Pro
113
103. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G
113
103. Xiaomi 12
113
106. Oppo Reno8 5G
112
106. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
112
108. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G
111
108. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos)
111
108. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)
111
111. Google Pixel 5
109
111. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G
109
113. Asus ROG Phone 7
108
113. Fairphone 5
108
113. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Exynos)
108
113. Xiaomi 11T Pro
108
117. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
107
118. Oppo Find X3 Neo
106
119. Sony Xperia 1 III
105
120. Motorola Edge 40 Neo
103
121. Huawei P40
102
121. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G
102
123. Black Shark 5 Pro
101
123. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
101
125. Apple iPhone SE (2022)
100
125. Google Pixel 4a
100
127. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra
96
128. Oppo Find X5 Lite
95
129. Oppo Reno4 5G
94
130. Oppo A94 5G
93
130. Vivo X80 Lite 5G
93
132. Samsung Galaxy A72
92
132. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G
92
132. Samsung Galaxy A25 5G
92
135. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 5G
91
136. Oppo Reno6 5G
89
137. Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G
88
137. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
88
139. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
85
140. OnePlus Nord CE 5G
84
141. Samsung Galaxy A15 5G
83
141. Vivo Y76 5G
83
143. Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE
81
144. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
79
145. Sony Xperia 10 V
78
145. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G
78
147. TCL 40R 5G
76
148. Realme 9i 5G
75
148. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13
75
150. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
74
151. Honor 90 Lite
73
152. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)
70
152. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
70
154. Fairphone 4
69
154. Oppo A78 5G
69
154. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G
69
157. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
67
158. Motorola Moto G62 5G
66
159. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G
65
160. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
64
161. Sony Xperia 10 IV
63
161. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12
63
161. Xiaomi Redmi 13C
63
161. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G
63
165. Honor X7
61
165. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G
61
167. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11
60
168. Honor 70 Lite
58
169. Motorola Moto G23
54
170. Oppo A77 5G
53
171. Honor X8 5G
52
171. TCL 406
52
173. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022
51
174. Crosscall Action-X5
50
175. Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
48
176. Crosscall Core-Z5
47
177. Oppo A57
46
177. Oppo A16s 5G
46
179. Samsung Galaxy A05s
45
179. Xiaomi Redmi 12C
45
CAMERA
Position in Premium Ranking
3rd
1. Google Pixel 8
148
2. Apple iPhone 15
145
3. Xiaomi 14
138
4. Apple iPhone 14
133
4. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
133
6. Xiaomi 13T Pro
131
7. Xiaomi 13
130
8. Xiaomi 12T Pro
129
9. OnePlus 11
127
10. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)
126
11. Apple iPhone 13 mini
125
11. Apple iPhone 13
125
13. Xiaomi 13T
123
14. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
120
15. Apple iPhone 12
117
15. Apple iPhone 12 mini
117
15. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
117
15. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)
117
19. Apple iPhone 11
116
19. Asus Zenfone 8
116
19. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
116
22. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G
114
23. Xiaomi 12
113
24. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)
111
25. Google Pixel 5
109
26. Fairphone 5
108
26. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Exynos)
108
26. Xiaomi 11T Pro
108
29. Oppo Find X3 Neo
106
30. Huawei P40
102
31. Black Shark 5 Pro
101
31. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
101
33. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra
96
34. Crosscall Core-Z5
47

Pros

  • Accurate target exposure in all tested conditions
  • Fairly neutral white balance in all tested conditions
  • High details preservation in photo and video mode
  • Low level of noise in photo mode
  • In tele mode, high level of details

Cons

  • Exposure adaptation issues often visible in video in most tested conditions
  • Low contrast on faces under bright light and backlit conditions
  • In video mode, noise is noticeable in low-light conditions
  • Artifacts such as flare and ghosting often visible in photo mode

The Xiaomi 14 showed marked improvements in image quality, particularly in video, when compared to its predecessor, the Xiaomi 13, partly due to hardware enhancements such as a larger sensor and bigger aperture.

The device received high marks for its texture-noise tradeoff, with images that had a high level of details and low noise in most tested conditions.The texture-noise tradeoff is one of the best we have seen for this price range, outshining its direct competitors. The Xiaomi’s neutral white balance in most situations means that the device is particularly well suited for taking photos of landscapes. However, when taking photos of people outdoors, the images often showed mixed results, with low contrast on faces, and sometimes overexposure of the target. This would affect the color rendering, which was at times inaccurate and desaturated. The device showed some irregularity in autofocus. When photographing action scenes, images would contain some artifacts, such as ghosting, giving the photo an unnatural photo rendering.

The Xiaomi 14’s zoom performance was good for its segment, helped by the tele module’s  50 MP sensor, which provided images with rich textures, especially when using the long-range zoom.

The  Xiaomi 14’s video experience was much improved from previous generations. Target exposure was accurate and videos contained a wide dynamic range whether indoors or outdoors. Similarly to still photos, videos contained a lot of details and texture, while white balance remained fairly neutral. Video autofocus was a bit unstable while panning a scene, but autofocus in general was much better than it was on the Xiaomi 13. In addition, videos also showed some exposure instabilities in several tested conditions.

The Xiaomi 14’s video performance in low light was a little behind that of its competitors from the same price segment, mainly because of more noticeable noise and some inaccurate skin-tone rendering.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s Camera evaluations take place in laboratories and in real-world situations using a wide variety of subjects. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly by measurement software on our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests in which a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo, Zoom, and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an Overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

Xiaomi 14 Camera Scores vs Premium
This graph compares DXOMARK photo, zoom and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

Photo

137

Xiaomi 14

160

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+
i
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2,600 test images both in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, family, and landscape photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 1 to 1,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera
Xiaomi 14 Photo scores vs Premium
The photo tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses.
Xiaomi 14 – Accurate target exposure, neutral white balance. The level of detail is high, and noise is well controlled.
Autofocus irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ0EV Daylight Handheld
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed and also zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 1000Lux with Daylight illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

Zoom

134

Xiaomi 14

158

Huawei P60 Pro
i
About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate over 400 test images in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor, and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings and pinch zoom at various zoom factors from ultra wide to very long-range zoom. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting the images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements of chart mages captured in the lab under different conditions from 20 to 1000 lux and color temperatures from 2300K to 6500K.

Learn more about how we test camera
Xiaomi 14 Zoom Scores vs Premium
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length. Zooming-in scores are displayed on the right and Zooming-out scores on the left.

Video

138

Xiaomi 14

158

Apple iPhone 15 Pro
i
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2.5 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 1 to 1000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera
Xiaomi 14 Video scores vs Premium
Video tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.

Xiaomi 14 – Acceptable target exposure in low-light conditions with some limitations in dynamic range and noticeable exposure adaptation. Skin tones are not always accurate, and noise is visible. Details, however, are quite well-preserved for such a low-light condition.
DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

The post Xiaomi 14 Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-14-camera-test/feed/ 0 Xiaomi 14 CAMERA CAMERA BushWindow_Xiaomi14_DxOMark_05-00 Xiaomi 14 Audio test https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-14-audio-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-14-audio-test/#respond Tue, 27 Feb 2024 15:54:49 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=166566 We put the Xiaomi 14 through our rigorous DXOMARK Audio test suite to measure its performance both at recording sound using its built-in microphones, and at playing audio back through its speakers. In this review, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases. Overview Key audio [...]

The post Xiaomi 14 Audio test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Xiaomi 14 through our rigorous DXOMARK Audio test suite to measure its performance both at recording sound using its built-in microphones, and at playing audio back through its speakers.
In this review, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview


Key audio specifications include:

  • Two speakers (Top front under screen, bottom side)
  • No Jack audio output

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Xiaomi 14
Xiaomi 14
135
audio
137
Playback
Timbre
132

158

Dynamics
133

149

Spatial
143

162

Volume
134

162

Artifacts
105

157

129
Recording
Timbre
121

147

Dynamics
127

146

Spatial
116

159

Volume
118

170

Artifacts
145

Best

Background
134

166

AUDIO
Position in Global Ranking
44th
1. Black Shark 5 Pro
161
2. Asus ROG Phone 6
155
2. Honor Magic6 Pro
155
4. Asus ROG Phone 5
151
5. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders
149
5. Black Shark 4S Pro
149
5. Black Shark 4 Pro
149
5. Honor Magic3 Pro+
149
9. Asus ROG Phone 7
148
10. Xiaomi Mi 10 S
147
11. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
144
11. Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
144
13. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
143
14. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
142
14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
142
14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
142
14. Google Pixel 8 Pro
142
18. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
141
18. Apple iPhone 15
141
18. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
141
18. Apple iPhone 14
141
18. Huawei P60 Pro
141
23. Apple iPhone 12
140
23. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
140
23. Google Pixel 8
140
23. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
140
23. Xiaomi 13 Pro
140
28. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
139
28. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
139
28. Apple iPhone 12 mini
139
28. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
139
32. Apple iPhone 13
138
32. Asus ROG Phone 3
138
32. Google Pixel 6 Pro
138
32. Honor Magic5 Pro
138
32. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+
138
32. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE
138
38. Apple iPhone 13 mini
137
38. Google Pixel 7 Pro
137
38. Google Pixel 6
137
38. Honor Magic Vs
137
38. Honor Magic4 Pro
137
38. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
137
44. Google Pixel 6a
135
44. OnePlus Open
135
44. Oppo Find N2
135
44. Xiaomi 14
135
48. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
134
48. Vivo X100 Pro
134
48. Xiaomi 13
134
51. Google Pixel Fold
133
51. Huawei Mate 20 X
133
51. Lenovo Legion Y90
133
51. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
133
51. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
133
51. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
133
51. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
133
51. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
133
51. Vivo X90 Pro
133
60. Google Pixel 7a
132
60. Vivo X Fold
132
60. Vivo X90 Pro+
132
63. Apple iPhone XS Max
131
63. Asus Zenfone 10
131
63. Oppo Find X2 Pro
131
63. Oppo Find N2 Flip
131
67. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
130
67. Xiaomi Mix Fold 3
130
69. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
129
69. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
129
69. Xiaomi 12S Ultra
129
69. Xiaomi 12 Pro
129
73. OnePlus 11
128
73. Oppo Find X6 Pro
128
73. Oppo Find X5 Pro
128
73. POCO F4 GT
128
73. Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
128
73. Xiaomi Redmi K50 Gaming
128
73. Xiaomi 13T
128
73. Xiaomi 11T Pro
128
81. Oppo Find X6
127
81. Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G
127
81. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
127
81. Xiaomi 12T Pro
127
85. Apple iPhone 11
126
85. Motorola Razr 40 Ultra
126
85. OnePlus 10T 5G
126
85. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
126
85. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G
126
85. Xiaomi 12T
126
85. Xiaomi 11T
126
92. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
125
92. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
125
92. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)
125
95. Lenovo Legion Phone 2 Pro
124
96. Google Pixel 7
123
96. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G
123
98. Apple iPhone SE (2022)
122
98. Apple iPhone SE (2020)
122
98. Xiaomi 13T Pro
122
98. Xiaomi 12
122
102. OnePlus 9 Pro
121
102. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
121
102. Sony Xperia 1 IV
121
102. Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
121
106. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
120
106. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
120
106. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
120
109. Asus ROG Phone 2
119
109. Huawei P50 Pro
119
109. OnePlus 9
119
109. OnePlus 8
119
109. POCO F5 Pro
119
109. Xiaomi Redmi K40 Gaming
119
109. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
119
116. Realme GT Neo 3
118
116. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
118
116. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
118
116. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
118
116. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)
118
116. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)
118
122. Asus Zenfone 8
117
122. Google Pixel 4
117
122. OnePlus 10 Pro
117
122. OnePlus 8 Pro
117
122. Vivo iQOO 9 Pro
117
127. Motorola Edge 40 Pro
116
127. Motorola Edge+
116
127. Realme GT Neo 2 5G
116
127. Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
116
127. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
116
127. Xiaomi Redmi K40 Pro+
116
127. Xiaomi Mi 11
116
134. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
115
134. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G
115
134. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
115
134. Xiaomi Mi 11i
115
138. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold2 5G
114
138. Vivo iQOO 7 Legend
114
140. Google Pixel 5
113
140. LG V60 ThinQ 5G
113
140. OnePlus 7 Pro
113
140. Samsung Galaxy S20+
113
140. Samsung Galaxy S10+
113
140. Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ 5G (Exynos)
113
140. Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ (Exynos)
113
140. Sony Xperia 1 III
113
148. Nubia RedMagic 6 Pro
112
148. Nubia Red Magic 5S
112
148. Realme GT 5G
112
148. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G
112
152. Oppo A78 5G
111
152. Sony Xperia 5 IV
111
154. Oppo Find X3 Pro
110
155. Honor 70
109
155. Huawei Mate 30 Pro 5G
109
155. Oppo Find X5
109
155. POCO X3 NFC
109
155. Realme GT 2 Pro
109
155. Vivo X70 Pro+
109
155. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra
109
162. Huawei Mate 30 Pro
108
162. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
108
162. Oppo Find X3 Neo
108
162. Realme X2 Pro
108
166. Sony Xperia 5 V
107
167. Honor 90
106
167. Nothing Phone(1)
106
167. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
106
167. Oppo A77 5G
106
171. Lenovo Legion Phone Pro
105
171. Nothing Phone (2)
105
171. Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro
105
171. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
105
175. Honor V30 Pro
104
175. Oppo Reno8 5G
104
175. Oppo Reno5 Pro+ 5G
104
178. Black Shark 3 Pro
103
178. Nubia RedMagic 8 Pro
103
178. Oppo Find X5 Lite
103
178. Sony Xperia 1 II
103
182. Huawei P40 Pro
102
182. Motorola Edge 20 Pro
102
182. Oppo Reno6 5G
102
185. Motorola Razr
101
186. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
97
186. Xiaomi Mi CC9 Pro Premium Edition
97
188. Black Shark 2 Pro
96
188. Honor 20 Pro
96
188. Oppo Find X3 Lite
96
188. Vivo X51 5G
96
192. LG G8 ThinQ
95
192. Sony Xperia 10 IV
95
194. Nubia Red Magic 3S
94
195. Fairphone 4
93
195. Sony Xperia 1
93
195. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)
93
198. Fairphone 5
92
199. Vivo X60 Pro+
91
200. Nokia 7.2
87
201. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
86
AUDIO
Position in Premium Ranking
12th
1. Black Shark 5 Pro
161
2. Asus ROG Phone 5
151
3. Black Shark 4S Pro
149
3. Black Shark 4 Pro
149
5. Apple iPhone 15
141
5. Apple iPhone 14
141
7. Apple iPhone 12
140
7. Google Pixel 8
140
9. Apple iPhone 12 mini
139
10. Apple iPhone 13
138
11. Apple iPhone 13 mini
137
12. Xiaomi 14
135
13. Xiaomi 13
134
14. Lenovo Legion Y90
133
14. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
133
16. Asus Zenfone 10
131
17. OnePlus 11
128
17. Xiaomi 13T
128
17. Xiaomi 11T Pro
128
20. Xiaomi 12T Pro
127
21. Apple iPhone 11
126
21. OnePlus 10T 5G
126
23. Lenovo Legion Phone 2 Pro
124
24. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G
123
25. Xiaomi 13T Pro
122
25. Xiaomi 12
122
27. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
120
27. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
120
29. OnePlus 9
119
29. OnePlus 8
119
31. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
118
31. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)
118
31. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)
118
34. Asus Zenfone 8
117
34. Google Pixel 4
117
34. Vivo iQOO 9 Pro
117
37. Xiaomi Mi 11
116
38. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
115
38. Xiaomi Mi 11i
115
40. Google Pixel 5
113
40. LG V60 ThinQ 5G
113
40. OnePlus 7 Pro
113
43. Nubia RedMagic 6 Pro
112
44. Realme GT 2 Pro
109
44. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra
109
46. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
108
46. Oppo Find X3 Neo
108
48. Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro
105
49. Honor V30 Pro
104
49. Oppo Reno5 Pro+ 5G
104
51. Nubia RedMagic 8 Pro
103
52. Motorola Edge 20 Pro
102
53. Xiaomi Mi CC9 Pro Premium Edition
97
54. Vivo X51 5G
96
55. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)
93
56. Fairphone 5
92
57. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
86

Playback

Pros

  • Good timbre and dynamics
  • No artifacts at nominal volume

Cons

  • Timbre lacks bass
  • Narrow stereo image
  • Distortion and clipping at maximum volume

 

Recording

Pros

  • Good wind noise resilience, especially with main camera, effective noise-canceling in difficult conditions
  • Good audio zoom, noticeable side rejection at tele and super tele zoom, maintaining tonal balance without artifacts

Cons

  • Tonal balance could be better in most use cases
  • Envelope lacks sharpness and precision
  • Phasing issues in loud environment might impair distance rendition

With a score of 135, the Xiaomi 14 delivered fairly average results in the DXOMARK Audio tests. Our testers liked the playback performance through the built-in speakers, thanks to good timbre and dynamics. However, they also noted a lack of low-end, as well as some distortion and clipping when playing back sound at maximum volume. Playback results were overall best when playing games, but almost on the same level for listening to music and watching movies.

The Xiaomi did less well in the recording category, with recorded audio clips showing some issues with timbre, as well as dynamics that left some room for improvement. On the plus side, the results for audio zoom and wind noise were good, making the Xiaomi 14 a decent option for isolating specific sound elements from the background and recording in windy conditions. In recording the Xiaomi 14 did best for voice memos. Recordings with the main and selfie cameras were not quite on the same level.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Audio tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone audio reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective tests and undertake more than 20 hours of perceptual evaluation under controlled lab conditions.
(For more details about our Playback protocol, click here; for more details about our Recording protocol, click here.)
The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations under the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

Playback

137

Xiaomi 14

163

Black Shark 5 Pro
i
How Audio Playback score is composed

DXOMARK engineers test playback through the smartphone speakers, whose performance is evaluated in our labs and in real-life conditions, using default apps and settings.

Learn more about how we test audio playback

Listen to the tested smartphone’s playback performance in this comparison with some of its competitors:

Xiaomi 14
Nubia Redmagic 8 Pro
Samsung Galaxy S23 FE
Recordings of the smartphones playing some of our music tracks at 60 LAeq in an anechoic environment by 2 microphones in A-B configuration, at 30 cm
Here is how the Xiaomi 14 performs in playback use cases compared to its competitors:
Playback use-cases scores

Timbre

132

Xiaomi 14

158

Black Shark 5 Pro
i

The Timbre score represents how well a phone reproduces sound across the audible tonal range and takes into account bass, midrange, treble, tonal balance, and volume dependency. It is the most important attribute for playback.

Music playback frequency response
A 1/12 octave frequency response graph, which measures the volume of each frequency emitted by the smartphone when playing a pure-sine wave in an anechoic environment.

Dynamics

133

Xiaomi 14

149

Black Shark 5 Pro
i

The Dynamics score measures the accuracy of changes in the energy level of sound sources, for example how precisely a bass note is reproduced or the impact sound from drums.


Spatial

143

Xiaomi 14

162

Black Shark 5 Pro
i

The sub-attributes for spatial tests include pinpointing a specific sound's location, its positional balance, distance, and wideness.


Volume

134

Xiaomi 14

162

Black Shark 5 Pro
i

The Volume score represents the overall loudness of a smartphone and how smoothly volume increases and decreases based on user input.

Here are a few sound pressure levels (SPL) measured when playing our sample recordings of hip-hop and classical music at maximum volume:
Hip-Hop Classical
Xiaomi 14 73.6 dBA 70.2 dBA
Nubia RedMagic 8 Pro 77 dBA 76.6 dBA
Samsung Galaxy S23 FE 74.1 dBA 70.9 dBA
The following graph shows the gradual changes in volume going from minimum to maximum. We expect these changes to be consistent across the range, so that all volume steps correspond to users’ expectations:
Music volume consistency
This line graph shows the relative loudness of playback relative to the user selected volume step, measured at different volume steps with a correlated pink noise in an anechoic box recorded in axis at 0.20 meter.

Artifacts

105

Xiaomi 14

157

Asus ROG Phone 5
i

The Artifacts score measures the extent to which the sound is affected by various types of distortion. The higher the score, the less the disturbances in the sound are noticeable. Distortion can occur because of sound processing in the device and because of the quality of the speakers.

Playback Total Harmonic Distortion (Maximum Volume)
This graph shows the Total Harmonic Distortion and Noise over the hearable frequency range.
It represents the distortion and noise of the device playing our test signal (0 dB Fs, Sweep Sine in an anechoic box at 40 cm) at the device's maximum volume.

Recording

129

Xiaomi 14

160

Honor Magic6 Pro
i
How Audio Recording score is composed

DXOMARK engineers test recording by evaluating the recorded files on reference audio equipment. Those recordings are done in our labs and in real-life conditions, using default apps and settings.

Learn more about how we test audio recording

Here is how the Xiaomi 14 performs in recording use cases compared to its competitors:

Recording use-cases scores

Timbre

121

Xiaomi 14

147

Honor Magic3 Pro+
i

The Timbre score represents how well a phone captures sounds across the audible tonal range and takes into account bass, midrange, treble, and tonal balance. It is the most important attribute for recording.

Life video frequency response
A 1/12 octave frequency response graph, which measures the volume of each frequency captured by the smartphone when recording a pure-sine wave in an anechoic environment.

Dynamics

127

Xiaomi 14

146

Black Shark 5 Pro
i

The Dynamics score measures the accuracy of changes in the energy level of sound sources, for example how precisely a voice's plosives (the p's, t's and k's, for example) are reproduced. The score also considers the Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR), for example how loud the main voice is compared to the background noise.


Spatial

116

Xiaomi 14

159

Vivo X Fold
i

The sub-attributes for spatial tests include pinpointing a specific sound's location, its positional balance, distance, and wideness on the recorded audio files.

Recording directivity
Directivity graph of the smartphone when recording test signals using the camera app, with the main camera. It represents the acoustic energy (in dB) over the angle of incidence of the sound source. (Normalized to the angle 0°, in front of the device.)

Volume

118

Xiaomi 14

170

Black Shark 5 Pro
i

The Volume score represents how loud audio is normalized on the recorded files and the how the device handles loud environments, such as electronic concerts, when recording.

Here are the sound levels recorded in the audio and video files, measured in LUFS (Loudness Unit Full Scale); as a reference, we expect loudness levels to be above -24 LUFS for recorded content:
Meeting Life Video Selfie Video Memo
Xiaomi 14 -24.4 LUFS -19.7 LUFS -17.6 LUFS -18.8 LUFS
Nubia RedMagic 8 Pro -33.5 LUFS -24.4 LUFS -19.2 LUFS -28.4 LUFS
Samsung Galaxy S23 FE -24.2 LUFS -21.1 LUFS -19.6 LUFS -20.7 LUFS

Artifacts

145

Xiaomi 14

Best

i

The Artifacts score measures the extent to which the recorded sounds are affected by various types of distortions. The higher the score, the less the disturbances in the sound are noticeable. Distortions can occur because of sound processing in the device and the quality of the microphones, as well as user handling, such as how the phone is held.

In this audio comparison, you can listen to the way this smartphone handles wind noise relative to its competitors:

Recordings of a voice sample with light background noise, facing a turbulent wind of 5 m/s

Background

134

Xiaomi 14

166

Black Shark 5 Pro
i

Background evaluates how natural the various sounds around a voice blend into the video recording file. For example, when recording a speech at an event, the background should not interfere with the main voice, yet it should provide some context of the surroundings.

The post Xiaomi 14 Audio test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-14-audio-test/feed/ 0 Xiaomi 14 Best AUDIO AUDIO Best Xiaomi 14 Display test https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-14-display-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-14-display-test/#respond Tue, 27 Feb 2024 10:44:59 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=167089&preview=true&preview_id=167089 We put the Xiaomi 14 through our rigorous DXOMARK Display test suite to measure its performance across six criteria. In this test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases. Overview Key display specifications: 6.36 inches OLED (~89.8% screen-to-body ratio) Resolution: 1200 x 2670 pixels, [...]

The post Xiaomi 14 Display test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Xiaomi 14 through our rigorous DXOMARK Display test suite to measure its performance across six criteria. In this test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview

Key display specifications:

  • 6.36 inches OLED (~89.8% screen-to-body ratio)
  • Resolution: 1200 x 2670 pixels, (~460 ppi density)
  • Refresh rate: 120 Hz

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Xiaomi 14 Xiaomi 14
133
display
Readability
136

163

Color
159

164

Video
124

162

Motion
112

159

Touch
111

170

Artifacts
133

163

DISPLAY
Position in Global Ranking
54th
1. Honor Magic6 Pro
157
2. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
155
3. Google Pixel 8 Pro
154
3. Google Pixel 8
154
3. Samsung Galaxy S24+
154
3. Samsung Galaxy S24
154
7. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
152
8. Google Pixel Fold
151
8. Honor Magic V2
151
8. Honor Magic5 Pro
151
11. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
149
11. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
149
11. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
149
11. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
149
11. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
149
16. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
148
16. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
148
18. OnePlus Open
147
19. Google Pixel 7 Pro
146
19. Huawei P60 Pro
146
19. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
146
22. Apple iPhone 15
145
22. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
145
24. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
144
24. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
144
26. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
141
27. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
140
27. Google Pixel 7a
140
27. Google Pixel 7
140
27. Honor Magic4 Ultimate
140
27. Honor 90
140
27. Oppo Find X6 Pro
140
27. Vivo X Fold
140
34. Apple iPhone 14
139
34. Asus ROG Phone 7
139
34. Honor Magic Vs
139
34. Oppo Find X5 Pro
139
34. Xiaomi Mix Fold 3
139
39. Oppo Find X5
138
40. Apple iPhone 13
136
40. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
136
40. Xiaomi 13 Pro
136
43. Huawei P50 Pro
135
43. Nothing Phone (2)
135
43. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
135
43. Vivo X90 Pro+
135
43. Xiaomi 13
135
48. Asus Zenfone 10
134
48. Oppo Find X6
134
48. Oppo Find N2
134
48. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
134
48. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
134
48. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)
134
54. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
133
54. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
133
54. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
133
54. Vivo X90 Pro
133
54. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
133
54. Xiaomi 14
133
60. Vivo X70 Pro+
132
61. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
131
61. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
131
61. Sony Xperia 5 IV
131
61. Xiaomi 12T
131
65. Apple iPhone 13 mini
130
65. Google Pixel 6 Pro
130
65. Honor Magic4 Pro
130
65. Oppo Find N2 Flip
130
65. Realme GT 2 Pro
130
65. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
130
65. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
130
72. OnePlus 11
129
72. OnePlus 10 Pro
129
72. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
129
72. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
129
72. TCL 20 Pro 5G
129
72. Vivo X60 Pro+
129
72. Xiaomi 13T Pro
129
72. Xiaomi 13T
129
72. Xiaomi 11T
129
81. Asus ROG Phone 6
128
81. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G
128
81. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE
128
81. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
128
81. Sony Xperia 5 V
128
86. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
127
86. OnePlus 9 Pro
127
86. OnePlus 8T
127
86. Xiaomi 12T Pro
127
90. Oppo Find X3 Pro
126
90. Sony Xperia 1 IV
126
90. Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
126
93. Google Pixel 6a
125
93. Google Pixel 6
125
93. LG Wing
125
93. OnePlus 9
125
93. OnePlus 8 Pro
125
93. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)
125
93. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
125
93. Vivo iQOO 9 Pro
125
93. Xiaomi 12S Ultra
125
93. Xiaomi 11T Pro
125
103. Honor 70
124
103. Oppo Reno8 5G
124
103. Oppo Find N
124
103. Sony Xperia 5 III
124
103. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
124
103. Xiaomi Mi 11
124
109. Apple iPhone 12 Pro
123
109. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
123
109. Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
123
109. Vivo X51 5G
123
109. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G
123
114. Apple iPhone SE (2022)
122
114. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
122
114. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G
122
114. Oppo Find X3 Neo
122
114. Sony Xperia 1 III
122
114. Xiaomi 12 Pro
122
120. Apple iPhone 12
120
120. Huawei P40 Pro
120
120. Nothing Phone(1)
120
120. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
120
124. Motorola Edge 40 Pro
118
124. Realme GT 5G
118
124. Xiaomi 12
118
127. Motorola Razr 40 Ultra
117
127. Oppo Reno5 Pro+ 5G
117
127. Vivo iQOO 7 Legend
117
127. Xiaomi Mi 11i
117
131. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
116
131. Asus ROG Phone 5
116
133. Oppo Reno5 Pro 5G
114
134. Asus Zenfone 8
113
135. Oppo Reno6 5G
112
136. Motorola Edge 20 Pro
111
136. Oppo Find X3 Lite
111
136. Realme GT Neo 2 5G
111
136. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
111
140. Fairphone 5
110
140. Oppo Find X5 Lite
110
140. Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G
110
143. Lenovo Legion Y90
109
143. OnePlus Nord 2 5G
109
145. Sony Xperia 5 II
108
146. POCO F4 GT
107
146. Xiaomi Redmi K50 Gaming
107
148. Nubia RedMagic 6 Pro
105
149. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
104
149. Sony Xperia 10 V
104
149. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra
104
152. Oppo Find X2 Pro
103
153. Google Pixel 5
101
154. Google Pixel 4 XL
100
154. Sony Xperia 10 IV
100
156. Microsoft Surface Duo
99
157. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
98
158. Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro
97
159. Black Shark 4S Pro
95
159. Black Shark 4 Pro
95
159. Xiaomi Mi 10T Pro 5G
95
162. Black Shark 5 Pro
94
162. Vivo X80 Lite 5G
94
164. Asus ROG Phone 3
92
165. Fairphone 4
87
166. Crosscall Action-X5
77
167. Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
74
168. Xiaomi Black Shark 3 Pro
69
169. Nokia 8.3 5G
65
170. Lenovo Legion Phone 2 Pro
60
171. Samsung Galaxy A12
53
172. Realme C21
52
DISPLAY
Position in Premium Ranking
9th
1. Google Pixel 8
154
1. Samsung Galaxy S24
154
3. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
148
4. Apple iPhone 15
145
5. Apple iPhone 14
139
6. Apple iPhone 13
136
7. Xiaomi 13
135
8. Asus Zenfone 10
134
9. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
133
9. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
133
9. Xiaomi 14
133
12. Apple iPhone 13 mini
130
12. Realme GT 2 Pro
130
12. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
130
15. OnePlus 11
129
15. Xiaomi 13T Pro
129
15. Xiaomi 13T
129
18. Xiaomi 12T Pro
127
19. OnePlus 9
125
19. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)
125
19. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
125
19. Vivo iQOO 9 Pro
125
19. Xiaomi 11T Pro
125
24. Xiaomi Mi 11
124
25. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
123
25. Vivo X51 5G
123
27. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
122
27. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G
122
27. Oppo Find X3 Neo
122
30. Apple iPhone 12
120
31. Xiaomi 12
118
32. Oppo Reno5 Pro+ 5G
117
32. Xiaomi Mi 11i
117
34. Asus ROG Phone 5
116
35. Asus Zenfone 8
113
36. Motorola Edge 20 Pro
111
37. Fairphone 5
110
38. Lenovo Legion Y90
109
39. Nubia RedMagic 6 Pro
105
40. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra
104
41. Google Pixel 5
101
42. Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro
97
43. Black Shark 4S Pro
95
43. Black Shark 4 Pro
95
45. Black Shark 5 Pro
94
46. Nokia 8.3 5G
65
47. Lenovo Legion Phone 2 Pro
60

Pros

  • Smooth display experience when scrolling the web or playing video games
  • Adapted brightness in low-light conditions
  • Pleasing color rendering in indoor conditions

Cons

  • Many frame mismatches when playing video games or watching videos
  • Lack of brightness and dark details when watching HDR10 videos
  • Display is not uniform

The Xiaomi 14 had a mixed display performance in our tests, although it offered a very smooth screen experience in all use cases, with a steady performance in the readability and color attributes.

The device’s overall performance, however, did not quite reach that of the predecessor Xiaomi 13, weighed down by the display’s performance in the motion attribute and instability when watching HDR videos.

The Xiaomi 14’s screen also lacked uniformity in brightness and color.

Although Xiaomi says that the device can reach a peak brightness of 3000 nits, our tests showed the device reaching 2740 nits — but only for HDR video content. Our experts measured 923 nits under 20K lux and only 1490 nits under 100K lux on a classic (20% window) white image pattern. Therefore, the Xiaomi 14 might fall a bit short on readability for intense lighting conditions. However, the display managed its brightness well, particularly in low-light conditions.

Although the device showed an improvement in artifacts management over the Xiaomi 13, the screen registered a high level of flicker in default mode (an anti-flicker feature that is available to limit this phenomenon), similar to the Xiaomi 13. Strong aliasing was also visible while gaming.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Display tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone and other display reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective and perceptual tests under controlled lab and real-life conditions. Note that we evaluate display attributes using only the device’s built-in display hardware and its still image (gallery) and video apps at their default settings. (For in-depth information about how we evaluate smartphone and other displays, check out our articles, “How DXOMARK tests display quality” and “A closer look at DXOMARK Display testing.”

The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations under the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

Readability

136

Xiaomi 14

163

Samsung Galaxy S24+
i
How Display Readability score is composed

Readability evaluates how easily and comfortably users can read still content (photos & web) on the display under different real-life conditions. DXOMARK uses its Display Bench to recreate ambient light conditions ranging from total darkness to bright sunlight. In addition to laboratory tests, perceptual analysis is also made in real-life environments.

Learn more about how we test display readability
Luminance under various lighting conditions


Readability in an indoor (1000 lux) environment
From left to right: Xiaomi 14, Xiaomi 13, Samsung Galaxy S24, Apple iPhone 15
(Photos for illustration only)


Readability in an outdoor (20 000 lux) environment
From left to right: Xiaomi 14, Xiaomi 13, Samsung Galaxy S24, Apple iPhone 15
(Photos for illustration only)

Luminance uniformity measurement
This graph shows the uniformity of the display with a 20% gray pattern. The more visible the green color, the more uniform the display.

Color

159

Xiaomi 14

164

Google Pixel 8 Pro
i
How Display Color score is composed

The color attribute evaluates the capacity of the device to accurately reproduce colors. The measurements taken are for fidelity, white point color, and gamut coverage. We perform color evaluations for different lighting conditions to see how well the device can manage color in the surrounding environment. Colors are measured using a spectrophotometer in a controlled lighting environment. Perceptual analysis of color rendering is against the reference pattern displayed on a calibrated professional monitor.

Learn more about how we test display color
White point under D65 illuminant at 1000 lux


Color rendering indoors (1000 lux)
Clockwise from top left: Xiaomi 14, Xiaomi 13, Samsung Galaxy S24, Apple iPhone 15
(Photos for illustration only)


Color rendering outdoors (20 000 lux)
Clockwise from top left: Xiaomi 14, Xiaomi 13, Samsung Galaxy S24, Apple iPhone 15
(Photos for illustration only)

Color fidelity measurements
Xiaomi 14, color fidelity at 1000 lux in the sRGB color space
Xiaomi 14, color fidelity at 1000 lux in the Display-P3 color space
Each arrow represents the color difference between a target color pattern (base of the arrow) and its actual measurement (tip of the arrow). The longer the arrow, the more visible the color difference is. If the arrow stays within the circle, the color difference will be visible only to trained eyes.
Color behavior on angle
This graph shows the color shift when the screen is at an angle. Each dot represents a measurement at a particular angle. Dots inside the inner circle exhibit no color shift in angle; those between the inner and outer circle have shifts that only trained experts will see; but those falling outside the outer circle are noticeable.

Video

124

Xiaomi 14

162

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
i
How Display Video score is composed

Our video attribute evaluates the Standard Dynamic Range (SDR) and High Dynamic Range (HDR10) video handling of each device in indoor and low-light conditions. We measure tone mapping, color gamut, brightness and contrast of the display. We perform perceptual analysis against our professional reference monitor (Sony BVM-HX310) to ensure that the rendering respects the artistic intent.

Learn more about how we test display video
Video brightness at 10% APL in the dark ( < 5 lux)


Video rendering in a low-light (0 lux) environment
Clockwise from top left: Xiaomi 14, Xiaomi 13, Samsung Galaxy S24, Apple iPhone 15
(Photos for illustration only)

Gamut coverage for video content
HDR10 Gamut coverage
SDR Gamut coverage
The primary colors are measured both in HDR10 and SDR. The extracted color gamut shows the extent of the color area that the device can render. To respect the artistic intent, the measured gamut should match the master color space of each video.

Motion

112

Xiaomi 14

159

Honor Magic6 Pro
i
How Display Motion score is composed

The motion attribute evaluates the handling of dynamic contents. Frame drops, motion blur, and playback artifacts are scrutinized using games and videos.

Learn more about how we test display motion


Video frame drops
30 fps content
60 fps content
These long exposure photos present the number of frame irregularities in a 30-second video. A good performance shows a regular pattern (either a flat gray image or a pull-down pattern).

Touch

111

Xiaomi 14

170

Samsung Galaxy S24+
i
How Display Touch score is composed

To evaluate touch, DXOMARK uses a touch robot and a high-speed camera to play and record a set of scenarios for smoothness, accuracy and response-time evaluation.

Learn more about how we test display touch
Average Touch Response Time Xiaomi 14
64 ms
Fast
Good
Bad
Slow
This response time test evaluates precisely the time elapsed between a single touch of the robot on the screen and the displayed action. This test is applied to activities that require a high reactivity, such as gaming.

Artifacts

133

Xiaomi 14

163

OnePlus Open
i
How Display Artifacts score is composed

Evaluating artifacts means checking for the performance, image rendering and motion flaws that can affect the end-user experience. DXOMARK measures precisely the device’s reflectance and the presence of flicker, and assesses the impact of residual aliasing when playing video games, among other characteristics.

Learn more about how we test display motion
Average Reflectance (SCI) Xiaomi 14
4.7 %
Low
Good
Bad
High
Reflectance (SCI)
Measurements above show the reflection of the device within the visible spectrum range (400 nm to 700 nm). It includes both diffuse and specular reflection.
Flicker Frequency Xiaomi 14
480 Hz
Bad
Good
Bad
Great
Temporal Light Modulation
This graph represents the frequencies of lighting variation; the highest peak gives the main flicker frequency.
[image_title content=”Aliasing (closeup)”

Xiaomi 14

Xiaomi 14 – Crop 1
Xiaomi 14 – Crop 2
Xiaomi 14 – Crop 3

The post Xiaomi 14 Display test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-14-display-test/feed/ 0 Xiaomi 14 DISPLAY DISPLAY Xiaomi_14_readability_indoor Xiaomi_14_readability_shade Xiaomi_14_readability_uniformity Xiaomi_14_White_Point_CCT_vs_Ambient Xiaomi_14_color_indoor Xiaomi_14_color_shade Xiaomi_14_Color_Fidelity_Still_sRGB_1000lux_Zoom Xiaomi_14_Color_Fidelity_Still_P3_1000lux_Zoom Xiaomi_14_Scatter_Cono_White_P3_Zoom HDR10Reshoot Xiaomi_14_Gamut_Video_HDR10 Xiaomi_14_Gamut_Video_SDR Xiaomi_14_motion_framedrops_fps_1 Xiaomi_14_motion_framedrops_fps_2 Xiaomi_14_artifacts_aliasing_full Xiaomi_14_artifacts_aliasing_crops_dut_1 Xiaomi_14_artifacts_aliasing_crops_dut_2 Xiaomi_14_artifacts_aliasing_crops_dut_3 Honor Magic6 Pro Display test https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic6-pro-display-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic6-pro-display-test/#respond Sun, 25 Feb 2024 16:33:05 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=167453&preview=true&preview_id=167453 We put the Honor Magic6 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Display test suite to measure its performance across six criteria. In this test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases. Overview Key display specifications: 6.8 inches OLED, 109.8 cm2 (~91.9% screen-to-body ratio) Dimensions  162.5 [...]

The post Honor Magic6 Pro Display test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Honor Magic6 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Display test suite to measure its performance across
six criteria. In this test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview

Key display specifications:

  • 6.8 inches OLED, 109.8 cm2 (~91.9% screen-to-body ratio)
  • Dimensions  162.5 mm x 75.8 mm x 8.9 mm
  • Resolution: 1280 x 2800 pixels, (~453 ppi density)
  • Refresh rate: 120 Hz

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Honor Magic6 Pro Honor Magic6 Pro
157
display
Readability
161

163

Color
154

164

Video
157

162

Motion
159

Best

Touch
167

170

Artifacts
141

163

DISPLAY
Position in Global Ranking
1st
1. Honor Magic6 Pro
157
2. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
155
3. Google Pixel 8 Pro
154
3. Google Pixel 8
154
3. Samsung Galaxy S24+
154
3. Samsung Galaxy S24
154
7. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
152
8. Google Pixel Fold
151
8. Honor Magic V2
151
8. Honor Magic5 Pro
151
11. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
149
11. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
149
11. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
149
11. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
149
11. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
149
16. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
148
16. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
148
18. OnePlus Open
147
19. Google Pixel 7 Pro
146
19. Huawei P60 Pro
146
19. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
146
22. Apple iPhone 15
145
22. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
145
24. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
144
24. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
144
26. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
141
27. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
140
27. Google Pixel 7a
140
27. Google Pixel 7
140
27. Honor Magic4 Ultimate
140
27. Honor 90
140
27. Oppo Find X6 Pro
140
27. Vivo X Fold
140
34. Apple iPhone 14
139
34. Asus ROG Phone 7
139
34. Honor Magic Vs
139
34. Oppo Find X5 Pro
139
34. Xiaomi Mix Fold 3
139
39. Oppo Find X5
138
40. Apple iPhone 13
136
40. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
136
40. Xiaomi 13 Pro
136
43. Huawei P50 Pro
135
43. Nothing Phone (2)
135
43. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
135
43. Vivo X90 Pro+
135
43. Xiaomi 13
135
48. Asus Zenfone 10
134
48. Oppo Find X6
134
48. Oppo Find N2
134
48. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
134
48. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
134
48. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)
134
54. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
133
54. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
133
54. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
133
54. Vivo X90 Pro
133
54. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
133
54. Xiaomi 14
133
60. Vivo X70 Pro+
132
61. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
131
61. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
131
61. Sony Xperia 5 IV
131
61. Xiaomi 12T
131
65. Apple iPhone 13 mini
130
65. Google Pixel 6 Pro
130
65. Honor Magic4 Pro
130
65. Oppo Find N2 Flip
130
65. Realme GT 2 Pro
130
65. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
130
65. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
130
72. OnePlus 11
129
72. OnePlus 10 Pro
129
72. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
129
72. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
129
72. TCL 20 Pro 5G
129
72. Vivo X60 Pro+
129
72. Xiaomi 13T Pro
129
72. Xiaomi 13T
129
72. Xiaomi 11T
129
81. Asus ROG Phone 6
128
81. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G
128
81. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE
128
81. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
128
81. Sony Xperia 5 V
128
86. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
127
86. OnePlus 9 Pro
127
86. OnePlus 8T
127
86. Xiaomi 12T Pro
127
90. Oppo Find X3 Pro
126
90. Sony Xperia 1 IV
126
90. Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
126
93. Google Pixel 6a
125
93. Google Pixel 6
125
93. LG Wing
125
93. OnePlus 9
125
93. OnePlus 8 Pro
125
93. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)
125
93. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
125
93. Vivo iQOO 9 Pro
125
93. Xiaomi 12S Ultra
125
93. Xiaomi 11T Pro
125
103. Honor 70
124
103. Oppo Reno8 5G
124
103. Oppo Find N
124
103. Sony Xperia 5 III
124
103. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
124
103. Xiaomi Mi 11
124
109. Apple iPhone 12 Pro
123
109. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
123
109. Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
123
109. Vivo X51 5G
123
109. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G
123
114. Apple iPhone SE (2022)
122
114. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
122
114. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G
122
114. Oppo Find X3 Neo
122
114. Sony Xperia 1 III
122
114. Xiaomi 12 Pro
122
120. Apple iPhone 12
120
120. Huawei P40 Pro
120
120. Nothing Phone(1)
120
120. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
120
124. Motorola Edge 40 Pro
118
124. Realme GT 5G
118
124. Xiaomi 12
118
127. Motorola Razr 40 Ultra
117
127. Oppo Reno5 Pro+ 5G
117
127. Vivo iQOO 7 Legend
117
127. Xiaomi Mi 11i
117
131. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
116
131. Asus ROG Phone 5
116
133. Oppo Reno5 Pro 5G
114
134. Asus Zenfone 8
113
135. Oppo Reno6 5G
112
136. Motorola Edge 20 Pro
111
136. Oppo Find X3 Lite
111
136. Realme GT Neo 2 5G
111
136. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
111
140. Fairphone 5
110
140. Oppo Find X5 Lite
110
140. Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G
110
143. Lenovo Legion Y90
109
143. OnePlus Nord 2 5G
109
145. Sony Xperia 5 II
108
146. POCO F4 GT
107
146. Xiaomi Redmi K50 Gaming
107
148. Nubia RedMagic 6 Pro
105
149. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
104
149. Sony Xperia 10 V
104
149. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra
104
152. Oppo Find X2 Pro
103
153. Google Pixel 5
101
154. Google Pixel 4 XL
100
154. Sony Xperia 10 IV
100
156. Microsoft Surface Duo
99
157. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
98
158. Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro
97
159. Black Shark 4S Pro
95
159. Black Shark 4 Pro
95
159. Xiaomi Mi 10T Pro 5G
95
162. Black Shark 5 Pro
94
162. Vivo X80 Lite 5G
94
164. Asus ROG Phone 3
92
165. Fairphone 4
87
166. Crosscall Action-X5
77
167. Samsung Galaxy A22 5G
74
168. Xiaomi Black Shark 3 Pro
69
169. Nokia 8.3 5G
65
170. Lenovo Legion Phone 2 Pro
60
171. Samsung Galaxy A12
53
172. Realme C21
52
DISPLAY
Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking
1st
1. Honor Magic6 Pro
157
2. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
155
3. Google Pixel 8 Pro
154
3. Samsung Galaxy S24+
154
5. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
152
6. Google Pixel Fold
151
6. Honor Magic V2
151
6. Honor Magic5 Pro
151
9. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
149
9. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
149
9. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
149
9. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
149
9. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
149
14. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
148
15. OnePlus Open
147
16. Google Pixel 7 Pro
146
16. Huawei P60 Pro
146
16. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
146
19. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
145
20. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
144
20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
144
22. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
141
23. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
140
23. Honor Magic4 Ultimate
140
23. Oppo Find X6 Pro
140
23. Vivo X Fold
140
27. Asus ROG Phone 7
139
27. Honor Magic Vs
139
27. Oppo Find X5 Pro
139
27. Xiaomi Mix Fold 3
139
31. Oppo Find X5
138
32. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
136
32. Xiaomi 13 Pro
136
34. Huawei P50 Pro
135
34. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
135
34. Vivo X90 Pro+
135
37. Oppo Find X6
134
37. Oppo Find N2
134
37. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
134
37. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
134
37. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)
134
42. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
133
42. Vivo X90 Pro
133
42. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
133
45. Vivo X70 Pro+
132
46. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
131
46. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
131
46. Sony Xperia 5 IV
131
49. Google Pixel 6 Pro
130
49. Honor Magic4 Pro
130
49. Oppo Find N2 Flip
130
49. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
130
53. OnePlus 10 Pro
129
53. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
129
53. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
129
53. Vivo X60 Pro+
129
57. Asus ROG Phone 6
128
57. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G
128
57. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
128
57. Sony Xperia 5 V
128
61. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
127
61. OnePlus 9 Pro
127
63. Oppo Find X3 Pro
126
63. Sony Xperia 1 IV
126
63. Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
126
66. LG Wing
125
66. OnePlus 8 Pro
125
66. Xiaomi 12S Ultra
125
69. Oppo Find N
124
69. Sony Xperia 5 III
124
69. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
124
72. Apple iPhone 12 Pro
123
72. Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
123
74. Sony Xperia 1 III
122
74. Xiaomi 12 Pro
122
76. Huawei P40 Pro
120
77. Motorola Edge 40 Pro
118
78. Motorola Razr 40 Ultra
117
79. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
116
80. Sony Xperia 5 II
108
81. Oppo Find X2 Pro
103
82. Google Pixel 4 XL
100
83. Microsoft Surface Duo
99
84. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
98
85. Asus ROG Phone 3
92
86. Xiaomi Black Shark 3 Pro
69

Pros

  • Well-suited brightness levels for different lighting conditions
  • Best-in-class motion management
  • Accurate, reactive, and smooth touch panel
  • Good HDR video experience in low-light conditions

Cons

  • Immediate color shift when viewing at an angle
  • Perceivable striped pattern on a dark uniform background when in dark-room conditions

The Honor Magic6 Pro Display put in a top-scoring performance, with an all-around excellent user experience in all our use cases, particularly in gaming.

The Magic6 Pro’s readability was overall excellent in all lighting environments, with a steady and reliable performance. While the maximum brightness did not reach the same levels attained by the Galaxy S24 Ultra or even some of the Magic6 Pro’s competitors, the screen was consistently and comfortably readable in all conditions – not too bright in low-light or dark conditions and not too dark when outdoors to affect the user experience. Additionally, the outdoor brightness level remained consistent for all types of displayed content, which is not the case for most competitors’ devices, whose display luminance decreases as white areas on the screen increase. Although the device appeared uniform in our test, a faint striped pattern was visible on the screen when room or background conditions turned dark. However, this striped pattern was not visible in other lighting conditions.

The screen’s colors were generally accurate and quite stable outdoors, but our testers did note some immediate color shifts when holding the device at an angle. Although most screens shift colors at wide angles, the Magic6 Pro’s colors were shifting at relatively lower angles when compared with the competition.

The video-watching experience was quite satisfying and comfortable, with appropriate luminosity and good details in the dark tones, especially when viewing videos at night.

The device’s display showed significant improvements over its predecessor the Honor Magic5 Pro in all subscores, especially in motion. The Magic6 Pro achieved a top score in motion thanks to its exceptional management of frame mismatches and motion blur, providing the user with an excellent experience watching high-quality videos or playing video games. Also contributing to the top score in motion was the absence of any delayed playback when sliding forward or backward on a video.

In touch, the Honor Magic6 Pro came very close to the top score, but the screen lacked some smoothness when viewing the gallery. However, users who like to play video games on their phones should take note of the Honor Magic6 Pro’s touch response time, which at 53 ms shows a marked improvement from the Magic5 Pro’s 70 ms, and even surpassed the Galaxy S24 and Galaxy S24+’s measured 65 ms. (For those keeping track, the fastest touch response time we have tested so far was on the Lenovo Legion Y90, which clocked in at 41 ms!)

When it came to artifacts, the Honor Magic6 Pro managed them very well. No unintended touches were being executed on the screen, and the display was free of flicker.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Display tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone and other display reviews, DXOMARK
engineers perform a variety of objective and perceptual tests under controlled lab and real-life conditions.
Note that we evaluate display attributes using only the device’s built-in display hardware and its still image
(gallery) and video apps at their default settings. (For in-depth information about how we evaluate
smartphone and other displays, check out our articles, “How DXOMARK tests display quality” and “A closer look at DXOMARK Display testing.”

The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories.
Detailed performance evaluations under the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

Readability

161

Honor Magic6 Pro

163

Samsung Galaxy S24+
i
How Display Readability score is composed

Readability evaluates how easily and comfortably
users can read still content (photos & web) on the display under different real-life conditions. DXOMARK uses its
Display Bench to recreate ambient light conditions ranging from total darkness to bright sunlight. In addition to
laboratory tests, perceptual analysis is also made in real-life environments.

Learn more about how we test
display readability
Luminance under various lighting conditions


Readability in an indoor (1000 lux) environment
From left to right: Honor Magic6 Pro, Google Pixel 8 Pro, Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max, Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
(Photos for illustration only)


Readability in a sunlight (>90 000 lux) environment
From left to right: Honor Magic6 Pro, Google Pixel 8 Pro, Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
(Photos for illustration only)

Luminance uniformity measurement
This graph shows the uniformity of the display with a 20% gray pattern. The more visible the green
color, the more uniform the display.

Color

154

Honor Magic6 Pro

164

Google Pixel 8 Pro
i
How Display Color score is composed

The color attribute evaluates the capacity of the device to accurately reproduce colors. The measurements taken are for fidelity, white point color, and gamut coverage. We perform color evaluations for different lighting conditions to see how well the device can manage color in the surrounding environment. Colors are measured using a spectrophotometer in a controlled lighting environment. Perceptual analysis of color rendering is against the reference pattern displayed on a calibrated professional monitor.

Learn more about how we test display color
White point under D65 illuminant at 1000 lux


Color rendering indoors (1000 lux)
Clockwise from top left: Honor Magic6 Pro, Google Pixel 8 Pro, Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max, Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
(Photos for illustration only)


Color rendering in sunlight (>90 000 lux)
Clockwise from top left: Honor Magic6 Pro, Google Pixel 8 Pro, Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
(Photos for illustration only)
Color fidelity measurements
Honor Magic6 Pro, color fidelity at 1000 lux in the sRGB
color space
Honor Magic6 Pro, color fidelity at 1000 lux in the
Display-P3 color space
Each arrow represents the color difference between a target color pattern (base of the arrow) and
its actual measurement (tip of the arrow). The longer the arrow, the more visible the color difference is. If the arrow
stays within the circle, the color difference will be visible only to trained eyes.
Color behavior on angle
This graph shows the color shift when the screen is at an angle. Each dot represents a
measurement at a particular angle. Dots inside the inner circle exhibit no color shift in angle; those between the
inner and outer circle have shifts that only trained experts will see; but those falling outside the outer circle
are noticeable.

White spectrum with/without Blue Light Filter
Spectrum measurement comparison of a white web page with the Blue Light Filter on and off.

Video

157

Honor Magic6 Pro

162

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
i
How Display Video score is composed

Video brightness at 10% APL in the dark ( < 5 lux)


Video rendering in a low-light (0 lux) environment
Clockwise from top left: Honor Magic6 Pro, Google Pixel 8 Pro, Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max, Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
(Photos for illustration only)

Gamut coverage for video content
HDR10 Gamut coverage
SDR Gamut coverage
The primary colors are measured both in HDR10 and SDR. The extracted color gamut shows the extent
of the color area that the device can render. To respect the artistic intent, the measured gamut should match the master
color space of each video.

Motion

159

Honor Magic6 Pro

Best

i
How Display Motion score is composed

The motion attribute evaluates the handling of dynamic
contents. Frame drops, motion blur, and playback artifacts are scrutinized using games and videos.

Learn
more about how we test display motion


Video frame drops
30 fps content
60 fps content
These long exposure photos present the number of frame irregularities in a 30-second
video. A good performance shows a regular pattern (either a flat gray image or a pull-down pattern).

Touch

167

Honor Magic6 Pro

170

Samsung Galaxy S24+
i
How Display Touch score is composed

To evaluate touch, DXOMARK uses a touch robot
and a high-speed camera to play and record a set of scenarios for smoothness, accuracy and response-time
evaluation.

Average Touch Response Time Honor Magic6 Pro
53 ms
Fast
Good
Bad
Slow
This response time test evaluates precisely the time elapsed between a single touch of the robot on the screen and the displayed action. This test is applied to activities that require a high reactivity, such as gaming.

Artifacts

141

Honor Magic6 Pro

163

OnePlus Open
i
How Display Artifacts score is composed

Evaluating artifacts means checking for
the performance, image rendering and motion flaws that can affect the end-user experience. DXOMARK measures
precisely the device’s reflectance and the presence of flicker, and assesses the impact of residual aliasing
when playing video games, among other characteristics.

Learn more about how we test display
motion
Average Reflectance (SCI) Honor Magic6 Pro
5 %
Low
Good
Bad
High
Reflectance (SCI)
Measurements above show the reflection of the device within the visible spectrum range (400 nm to 700 nm). It includes both diffuse and specular reflection.
Flicker Frequency Honor Magic6 Pro
4320 Hz
Bad
Good
Bad
Great
Temporal Light Modulation
This graph represents the frequencies of lighting variation; the highest peak gives the main flicker frequency.

The post Honor Magic6 Pro Display test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic6-pro-display-test/feed/ 0 Honor Magic6 Pro Best DISPLAY DISPLAY Honor_Magic6_Pro_readability_indoor Honor_Magic6_Pro_readability_sunlight Honor_Magic6_Pro_readability_uniformity Honor_Magic6_Pro_White_Point_CCT_vs_Ambient Honor_Magic6_Pro_color_indoor Honor_Magic6_Pro_color_sunlight Honor_Magic6_Pro_Color_Fidelity_Still_sRGB_1000lux_Zoom Honor_Magic6_Pro_Color_Fidelity_Still_P3_1000lux_Zoom Honor_Magic6_Pro_Scatter_Cono_White_P3_Zoom Honor_Magic6_Pro_video_lowlight_1 Honor_Magic6_Pro_Gamut_Video_HDR10 Honor_Magic6_Pro_Gamut_Video_SDR Best Honor_Magic6_Pro_motion_framedrops_fps_1 Honor_Magic6_Pro_motion_framedrops_fps_2 Honor Magic6 Pro Battery test https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic6-pro-battery-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic6-pro-battery-test/#respond Sun, 25 Feb 2024 16:31:34 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=167407 We put the Honor Magic6 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Battery test suite to measure its performance in autonomy, charging and efficiency. In these test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases. Overview Key specifications: Battery capacity: 5600 mAh 80W charger (not included) 6.8-inch, [...]

The post Honor Magic6 Pro Battery test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Honor Magic6 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Battery test suite to measure its performance in autonomy, charging and efficiency. In these test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview

Key specifications:

  • Battery capacity: 5600 mAh
  • 80W charger (not included)
  • 6.8-inch, 1280 x 2800, 120 Hz, OLED display
  • Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen3（SM8650） (4 nm)
  • Tested ROM / RAM combination: 512 GB + 12 GB

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Honor Magic6 Pro
Honor Magic6 Pro
157
battery
168
Autonomy
Home/Office
189

221

On the go
127

195

Calibrated
157

198

151
Charging
Full charge
145

224

Quick boost
158

212

140
Efficiency
Charge up
121

205

Discharge
150

194

Key performances

Charging Time
3 days 9h
Battery life
Charging Time
0h29
80% Charging time
Charging Time
1h11
Full charging time
Quick Boost
7h36 autonomy
after 5-minute charge
BATTERY
Position in Global Ranking
1st
1. Honor Magic6 Pro
157
2. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
152
3. Honor X7b
151
3. Oppo Find X6 Pro
151
5. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)
150
6. Honor X7a
147
6. Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
147
8. Oppo Reno6 5G
146
9. Realme GT Neo 2 5G
144
10. Honor X9a
143
11. Honor X9b
142
11. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
142
13. Honor Magic5 Pro
141
13. Oppo Reno8 5G
141
15. Asus ROG Phone 6
140
15. Sony Xperia 10 V
140
17. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
139
18. Huawei P60 Pro
138
18. Nubia RedMagic 8 Pro
138
18. Oppo A77 5G
138
18. Sony Xperia 10 IV
138
22. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
136
22. OnePlus Nord CE 5G
136
22. Samsung Galaxy M51
136
22. Vivo Y72 5G
136
22. Vivo X80 Lite 5G
136
22. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G
136
22. Xiaomi 11T
136
29. Asus ROG Phone 7
135
29. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G
135
29. Oppo Find X5 Lite
135
32. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
134
32. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
134
32. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G
134
32. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10
134
36. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
133
36. Oppo A74
133
36. Vivo Y76 5G
133
36. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
133
36. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G
133
36. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
133
42. Honor X8 5G
132
42. Oppo A78 5G
132
42. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G
132
42. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10S
132
46. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
131
46. POCO F5 Pro
131
46. Samsung Galaxy A72
131
46. Wiko Power U30
131
50. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
130
50. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
130
52. Realme GT Neo 3
129
52. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G
129
52. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
129
52. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G
129
52. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro
129
57. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
128
57. OnePlus Nord 2 5G
128
57. Xiaomi 13
128
60. Honor 90 Lite
127
60. Nubia RedMagic 6 Pro
127
60. Oppo A94 5G
127
63. Honor 70
126
63. OnePlus 10T 5G
126
63. Oppo Find X3 Neo
126
63. Xiaomi 13 Pro
126
63. Xiaomi 11T Pro
126
68. OnePlus 11
125
68. Samsung Galaxy A13 5G
125
70. Nothing Phone (2)
124
71. Huawei P50 Pro
123
71. TCL 40R 5G
123
71. Xiaomi 12T Pro
123
74. OnePlus 9
122
75. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
121
75. Oppo A74 5G
121
77. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 5G
120
77. Xiaomi 13T Pro
120
79. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
119
79. Nothing Phone(1)
119
79. Oppo A54 5G
119
79. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11
119
83. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
118
83. Motorola Edge 20 Pro
118
83. Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro
118
83. Xiaomi 12T
118
83. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G
118
88. Realme GT 2 Pro
117
88. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
117
90. Honor X7
116
90. Honor 90
116
90. Oppo Find X5 Pro
116
90. Vivo Y20s
116
94. Apple iPhone 13
115
94. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G
115
94. Realme GT 5G
115
97. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
114
97. Huawei P40 Lite
114
97. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
114
97. Xiaomi Mi 10T Pro 5G
114
97. Xiaomi 13T
114
102. Apple iPhone 15
113
102. Nokia G42 5G
113
102. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
113
102. Sony Xperia 5 IV
113
106. Apple iPhone 14
112
106. Motorola Moto G62 5G
112
106. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G
112
106. OnePlus 8T
112
110. Google Pixel 8 Pro
111
110. Motorola Moto G9 Power
111
110. Oppo Find X5
111
110. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
111
114. Wiko Power U20
110
115. Oppo Find X3 Lite
109
115. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
109
115. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
109
118. Honor Magic Vs
108
118. Oppo Find N2 Flip
108
118. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)
108
118. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
108
122. Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G
107
123. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
106
124. Black Shark 5 Pro
105
124. Oppo Find X3 Pro
105
126. OnePlus 9 Pro
104
127. Google Pixel 8
103
127. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
103
127. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
103
130. Asus Zenfone 8 Flip
102
130. Asus Zenfone 8
102
130. Google Pixel 7 Pro
102
133. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE
101
134. OnePlus 10 Pro
100
134. POCO F4 GT
100
134. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)
100
134. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022
100
134. Xiaomi 12
100
139. Apple iPhone 13 mini
99
139. Realme C21
99
139. Realme C11
99
139. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
99
139. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
99
144. Google Pixel 7
98
144. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
98
144. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
98
147. Google Pixel 6
97
148. Google Pixel 7a
96
148. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
96
148. Vivo X51 5G
96
151. Honor Magic4 Pro
95
151. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
95
151. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
95
151. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
95
151. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G
95
156. Google Pixel 6a
94
157. Apple iPhone 12 mini
93
157. Google Pixel 5
93
157. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
93
160. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
92
161. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
90
162. Google Pixel Fold
88
162. Xiaomi Redmi 9
88
164. Sony Xperia 1 IV
87
164. TCL 406
87
166. Apple iPhone SE (2022)
84
167. Fairphone 5
83
168. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
82
168. Xiaomi Mi 11
82
170. Google Pixel 6 Pro
81
171. Xiaomi 12 Pro
76
172. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
75
BATTERY
Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking
1st
1. Honor Magic6 Pro
157
2. Oppo Find X6 Pro
151
3. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
142
4. Honor Magic5 Pro
141
5. Asus ROG Phone 6
140
6. Huawei P60 Pro
138
7. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
136
8. Asus ROG Phone 7
135
9. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
134
9. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
134
11. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
133
11. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
133
13. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
131
14. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
130
15. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
128
16. Xiaomi 13 Pro
126
17. Huawei P50 Pro
123
18. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
121
19. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
119
20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
118
21. Oppo Find X5 Pro
116
22. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
114
22. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
114
24. Sony Xperia 5 IV
113
25. Google Pixel 8 Pro
111
25. Oppo Find X5
111
25. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
111
28. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
109
29. Honor Magic Vs
108
29. Oppo Find N2 Flip
108
29. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
108
32. Oppo Find X3 Pro
105
33. OnePlus 9 Pro
104
34. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
103
34. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
103
36. Google Pixel 7 Pro
102
37. OnePlus 10 Pro
100
38. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
99
38. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
99
40. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
98
41. Honor Magic4 Pro
95
41. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
95
41. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
95
44. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
93
45. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
92
46. Google Pixel Fold
88
47. Sony Xperia 1 IV
87
48. Google Pixel 6 Pro
81
49. Xiaomi 12 Pro
76

Pros

  • Excellent indoor autonomy
  • Great showing in video streaming, gaming, and idle screen on
  • Overall low discharging currents in most of the indoor test cases
  • Less than 1h 20 mins required to fully charge the battery with both wired and wireless charger

Cons

  • Relatively short autonomy in idle screen off and music streaming Wi-Fi tests
  • High residual power drain no matter the device is still plugged in or not

The Honor Magic6 Pro provided an excellent overall battery experience, with impressive improvements in autonomy and charging that pushed the flagship device into the top position of the Battery ranking, a rare feat for an ultra-premium smartphone.

Equipped with a large 5600 mAh battery, the Honor Magic6 Pro, offered more than 3 and a half days of autonomy under moderate usage. The device performed impressively in most individual test cases, including the idle screen-on, video streaming, gaming, and calling. However, idle screen off and music-streaming test cases under Wi-Fi conditions showed weaker performances.

The peak wired charging power supported by the Honor Magic6 Pro increased to 80W, allowing the device to be fully charged in 1 hour and  11 minutes. The maximum wireless charging power at 66W  was not far behind, providing a full charge in less than 1 hour 20 mins.  In our 5-minute quick charge test, the device was able to regain more than 7.5 hours of autonomy, which ranked it at the top half of our database.

The Honor Magic6 Pro’s charge-up efficiency was 75%, which is somewhat less efficient when compared with other devices. The device demonstrated a relatively high residual power drain, whether it remained plugged in or not.  However, the device’s discharging currents were consistently low, except during periods of idle screen off and when streaming music over Wi-Fi, indicating the device was generally well-optimized.

The battery experience often presents a challenge for ultra-premium smartphones, which have to find the right balance between optimizing new power-demanding features and providing a satisfying user experience. The Honor Magic6 Pro clearly emerged as the frontrunner in this segment when compared to other devices, thanks to the outstanding battery life and fine-tuning that solidifies its user experience as the best so far.

Test Summary

About DXOMARK Battery tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone battery reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective tests over a week-long period both indoors and outdoors. (See our introductory and how we test articles for more details about our smartphone Battery protocol.)

The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations under the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

Battery Charger Wireless Display Processor
Honor Magic6 Pro 5600mAh 80W
(not included)		 66W OLED
1280 x 2800		 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3
Honor Magic5 Pro 5100mAh 66W
(not included)		 50W OLED
1312 x 2848		 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2
Huawei P60 Pro 4815mAh 88W
(included)		 50W LTPO OLED
1220 x 2700		 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1

Autonomy

168

Honor Magic6 Pro

195

Honor X7b
i
How Autonomy score is composed

Autonomy score is composed of three performance sub-scores: Home / Office, On the go, and Calibrated use cases. Each sub-score comprises the results of a comprehensive range of tests for measuring autonomy in all kinds of real-life scenarios.

Learn more about how we test battery
Light Usage
113h
Light Usage
Active: 2h30/day
Moderate Usage
81h
Moderate Usage
Active: 4h/day
Intense Usage
51h
Intense Usage
Active: 7h/day
BATTERY
Position in Global Ranking
Battery Life (moderate)
4th
1. Honor X7b
95h
2. Honor X7a
86h
3. Vivo Y72 5G
85h
4. Honor Magic6 Pro
81h
5. Honor X9b
81h
6. Wiko Power U30
80h
7. Sony Xperia 10 IV
80h
8. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)
77h
9. Oppo A77 5G
76h
10. Sony Xperia 10 V
75h
11. Honor X8 5G
74h
12. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
74h
13. Samsung Galaxy M51
73h
14. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G
72h
15. Asus ROG Phone 6
72h
16. Asus ROG Phone 7
72h
17. Honor X9a
72h
18. Wiko Power U20
71h
19. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 5G
70h
20. Oppo A78 5G
70h
21. Vivo Y20s
69h
22. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
69h
23. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10
69h
24. Samsung Galaxy A13 5G
69h
25. Samsung Galaxy A72
69h
26. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
68h
27. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro
67h
28. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
67h
29. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G
67h
30. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
66h
31. Honor Magic5 Pro
65h
32. Motorola Moto G62 5G
65h
33. Honor X7
65h
34. TCL 40R 5G
65h
35. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G
65h
36. Oppo A54 5G
65h
37. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
65h
38. Nokia G42 5G
64h
39. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
64h
40. OnePlus Nord CE 5G
64h
41. Vivo Y76 5G
64h
42. Oppo Find X6 Pro
64h
43. Oppo A74
64h
44. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
64h
45. Motorola Moto G9 Power
64h
46. Oppo A74 5G
63h
47. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
63h
48. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G
62h
49. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
62h
50. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G
62h
51. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10S
61h
52. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G
61h
53. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
61h
54. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
60h
55. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11
60h
56. Xiaomi 13 Pro
60h
57. Realme GT Neo 2 5G
60h
58. Nubia RedMagic 8 Pro
60h
59. Honor 90 Lite
60h
60. Xiaomi 11T
59h
61. TCL 406
59h
62. Vivo X80 Lite 5G
59h
63. Realme C11
59h
64. POCO F5 Pro
59h
65. Honor 70
58h
66. Oppo Find X5 Lite
58h
67. Oppo A94 5G
58h
68. Oppo Reno8 5G
58h
69. Huawei P60 Pro
57h
70. Realme C21
57h
71. Oppo Reno6 5G
57h
72. Sony Xperia 5 IV
57h
73. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022
57h
74. Honor 90
57h
75. Xiaomi 11T Pro
57h
76. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
56h
77. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
56h
78. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
56h
79. OnePlus 10T 5G
55h
80. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G
55h
81. Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
55h
82. Nothing Phone (2)
55h
83. Google Pixel 8 Pro
55h
84. Google Pixel 7a
55h
85. OnePlus Nord 2 5G
54h
86. Nothing Phone(1)
54h
87. OnePlus 9
54h
88. Xiaomi 13T
54h
89. Xiaomi 13
54h
90. Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G
54h
91. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
54h
92. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
54h
93. Xiaomi 12T Pro
54h
94. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
53h
95. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G
53h
96. Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro
53h
97. Honor Magic Vs
53h
98. Apple iPhone 14
53h
99. Apple iPhone 13
52h
100. Motorola Edge 20 Pro
52h
101. OnePlus 11
52h
102. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G
52h
103. Xiaomi 13T Pro
52h
104. Realme GT Neo 3
52h
105. Xiaomi 12T
52h
106. Google Pixel 7 Pro
52h
107. Realme GT 5G
52h
108. Huawei P50 Pro
51h
109. Oppo Find X3 Neo
51h
110. Xiaomi Mi 10T Pro 5G
51h
111. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
51h
111. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
51h
113. Apple iPhone 15
51h
114. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
51h
115. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
50h
116. Google Pixel 6a
50h
117. Huawei P40 Lite
50h
118. Realme GT 2 Pro
50h
119. Xiaomi Redmi 9
50h
120. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)
50h
121. Oppo Find N2 Flip
49h
122. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
49h
123. Asus Zenfone 8 Flip
49h
124. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G
49h
125. Oppo Find X5 Pro
49h
126. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G
49h
127. Google Pixel 7
49h
128. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
49h
129. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
49h
130. Google Pixel 8
49h
131. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
48h
132. Google Pixel 6
48h
133. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
48h
134. Oppo Find X5
48h
135. Google Pixel Fold
47h
136. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
47h
137. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
47h
138. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
47h
139. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE
47h
140. Sony Xperia 1 IV
47h
141. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
46h
142. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)
46h
143. Oppo Find X3 Lite
46h
144. Nubia RedMagic 6 Pro
46h
145. Xiaomi 12
45h
146. OnePlus 8T
45h
147. Asus Zenfone 8
45h
148. Google Pixel 5
44h
149. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
44h
150. Oppo Find X3 Pro
44h
151. OnePlus 10 Pro
43h
152. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
43h
153. OnePlus 9 Pro
43h
154. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
43h
155. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
42h
156. Google Pixel 6 Pro
41h
157. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
41h
158. Black Shark 5 Pro
41h
159. Apple iPhone 13 mini
41h
160. Apple iPhone 12 mini
40h
161. POCO F4 GT
40h
162. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
40h
163. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
39h
164. Honor Magic4 Pro
39h
165. Vivo X51 5G
38h
166. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
38h
167. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
38h
168. Fairphone 5
37h
169. Apple iPhone SE (2022)
37h
170. Xiaomi Mi 11
36h
171. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
35h
172. Xiaomi 12 Pro
34h
BATTERY
Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking
Battery Life (moderate)
1st
1. Honor Magic6 Pro
81h
2. Asus ROG Phone 6
72h
3. Asus ROG Phone 7
72h
4. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
69h
5. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
68h
6. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
67h
7. Honor Magic5 Pro
65h
8. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
65h
9. Oppo Find X6 Pro
64h
10. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
64h
11. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
63h
12. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
61h
13. Xiaomi 13 Pro
60h
14. Huawei P60 Pro
57h
15. Sony Xperia 5 IV
57h
16. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
56h
17. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
56h
18. Google Pixel 8 Pro
55h
19. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
54h
20. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
54h
21. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
53h
22. Honor Magic Vs
53h
23. Google Pixel 7 Pro
52h
24. Huawei P50 Pro
51h
25. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
51h
26. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
50h
27. Oppo Find N2 Flip
49h
28. Oppo Find X5 Pro
49h
29. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
49h
30. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
49h
31. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
48h
32. Oppo Find X5
48h
33. Google Pixel Fold
47h
34. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
47h
35. Sony Xperia 1 IV
47h
36. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
46h
37. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
44h
38. Oppo Find X3 Pro
44h
39. OnePlus 10 Pro
43h
40. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
43h
41. OnePlus 9 Pro
43h
42. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
43h
43. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
42h
44. Google Pixel 6 Pro
41h
45. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
41h
46. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
40h
47. Honor Magic4 Pro
39h
48. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
38h
49. Xiaomi 12 Pro
34h

Home/Office

189

Honor Magic6 Pro

221

Honor X7b
i

A robot housed in a Faraday cage performs a set of touch-based user actions during what we call our “typical usage scenario” (TUS) — making calls, video streaming, etc. — 4 hours of active use over the course of a 16-hour period, plus 8 hours of “sleep.” The robot repeats this set of actions every day until the device runs out of power.

Typical Usage Scenario discharge curves

On the go

127

Honor Magic6 Pro

195

Samsung Galaxy M51
i

Using a smartphone on the go takes a toll on autonomy because of extra “hidden” demands, such as the continuous signaling associated with cellphone network selection, for example. DXOMARK Battery experts take the phone outdoors and perform a precisely defined set of activities while following the same three-hour travel itinerary (walking, taking the bus, the subway…) for each device

Autonomy for on the go use cases (full charge)

Calibrated

157

Honor Magic6 Pro

198

Samsung Galaxy M51
i

For this series of tests, the smartphone returns to the Faraday cage and our robots repeatedly perform actions linked to one specific use case (such as gaming, video streaming, etc.) at a time. Starting from an 80% charge, all devices are tested until they have expended at least 5% of their battery power.

Autonomy for calibrated use cases (full charge)

Charging

151

Honor Magic6 Pro

218

Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
i
How Charging score is composed

Charging is fully part of the overall battery experience. In some situations where autonomy is at a minimum, knowing how fast you can charge becomes a concern. The DXOMARK Battery charging score is composed of two sub-scores, (1) Full charge and (2) Quick boost.

Learn more about how we test battery
Wired
Wired
82%
in 30 min
0h29
0 - 80%
1h11
Full charge
Wireless
Wireless
69%
in 30 min
0h37
0 - 80%
1h16
Full charge

Full charge

145

Honor Magic6 Pro

224

Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
i

Full charge tests assess the reliability of the battery power gauge; measure how long and how much power the battery takes to charge from zero to 80% capacity, from 80 to 100% as shown by the UI, and until an actual full charge.

BATTERY
Position in Global Ranking
Charging Time 0-80%
43rd
1. Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
0h08
2. Black Shark 5 Pro
0h13
3. Realme GT Neo 3
0h14
4. Nubia RedMagic 6 Pro
0h14
5. OnePlus 10T 5G
0h16
6. POCO F4 GT
0h17
7. OnePlus 11
0h18
8. Xiaomi 11T Pro
0h18
9. Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro
0h19
10. Oppo Reno8 5G
0h21
11. Realme GT 5G
0h21
12. Xiaomi 12 Pro
0h21
13. OnePlus 9
0h21
14. Oppo Reno6 5G
0h22
15. Xiaomi 12T Pro
0h22
16. OnePlus 9 Pro
0h22
17. Honor Magic4 Pro
0h22
18. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G
0h22
19. OnePlus Nord 2 5G
0h22
20. Oppo Find X5 Lite
0h22
21. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
0h22
22. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G
0h23
23. Oppo Find X3 Pro
0h23
24. Oppo Find X3 Neo
0h23
25. Xiaomi 13 Pro
0h23
26. Oppo Find X5 Pro
0h23
27. Oppo Find X6 Pro
0h24
28. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G
0h24
29. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
0h24
30. Oppo Find X5
0h25
31. OnePlus 8T
0h25
32. Xiaomi 12T
0h25
33. Realme GT Neo 2 5G
0h25
34. Oppo Find X3 Lite
0h26
35. Realme GT 2 Pro
0h26
36. OnePlus 10 Pro
0h26
37. Xiaomi 12
0h27
38. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
0h28
39. Nubia RedMagic 8 Pro
0h28
40. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
0h28
41. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G
0h28
42. Xiaomi 13
0h29
43. Honor Magic6 Pro
0h29
44. Huawei P60 Pro
0h29
45. Honor Magic Vs
0h29
46. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G
0h29
47. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
0h29
48. Xiaomi 13T Pro
0h30
49. Xiaomi 11T
0h30
50. Huawei P50 Pro
0h30
51. Xiaomi Mi 11
0h31
52. POCO F5 Pro
0h32
53. Honor 70
0h32
54. Nothing Phone (2)
0h32
55. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G
0h33
56. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
0h34
57. Huawei P40 Lite
0h34
58. Xiaomi 13T
0h35
59. Asus ROG Phone 6
0h35
60. Honor 90
0h35
61. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
0h37
62. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
0h37
63. Honor Magic5 Pro
0h37
64. Asus ROG Phone 7
0h37
65. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
0h37
66. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
0h38
67. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G
0h38
68. Oppo A94 5G
0h39
69. Vivo Y76 5G
0h39
70. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
0h39
71. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
0h40
72. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
0h40
73. Vivo X51 5G
0h41
74. Vivo X80 Lite 5G
0h42
75. OnePlus Nord CE 5G
0h42
76. Motorola Edge 20 Pro
0h43
77. Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G
0h43
78. Xiaomi Mi 10T Pro 5G
0h43
79. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
0h44
80. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G
0h44
81. Oppo Find N2 Flip
0h45
82. Asus Zenfone 8
0h45
83. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
0h46
84. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
0h46
85. Nothing Phone(1)
0h47
85. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)
0h47
87. Google Pixel 8
0h48
88. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
0h48
89. Oppo A74
0h48
90. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)
0h48
91. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)
0h49
92. Google Pixel 8 Pro
0h49
93. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11
0h49
94. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE
0h49
95. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
0h49
96. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
0h49
97. Oppo A78 5G
0h49
98. Oppo A77 5G
0h50
99. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
0h50
99. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
0h50
101. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
0h51
102. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
0h51
103. Honor 90 Lite
0h51
104. Apple iPhone SE (2022)
0h51
104. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G
0h51
106. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
0h51
107. Apple iPhone 12 mini
0h52
108. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10
0h52
109. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10S
0h52
110. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
0h52
111. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
0h52
112. Honor X9a
0h53
113. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
0h53
114. Apple iPhone 14
0h54
115. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
0h54
116. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G
0h54
116. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
0h54
118. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
0h54
119. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro
0h55
120. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
0h56
121. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
0h56
122. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
0h57
123. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
0h57
124. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
0h57
125. Apple iPhone 13 mini
0h57
126. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
0h57
127. Samsung Galaxy A72
0h58
128. Apple iPhone 13
0h58
129. Google Pixel Fold
1h00
130. Google Pixel 7
1h00
131. Honor X9b
1h01
132. Asus Zenfone 8 Flip
1h01
133. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
1h01
134. Honor X8 5G
1h02
135. Apple iPhone 15
1h02
136. Google Pixel 6 Pro
1h02
137. Google Pixel 6
1h03
137. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
1h03
139. Google Pixel 7 Pro
1h03
140. Honor X7
1h05
141. Sony Xperia 1 IV
1h05
142. Sony Xperia 5 IV
1h05
143. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
1h06
144. Fairphone 5
1h07
145. Google Pixel 7a
1h07
146. Honor X7b
1h08
147. Honor X7a
1h10
148. Google Pixel 6a
1h11
149. Google Pixel 5
1h14
150. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
1h15
151. Vivo Y72 5G
1h18
152. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G
1h20
153. Oppo A74 5G
1h21
154. Sony Xperia 10 V
1h22
155. Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 5G
1h22
156. Samsung Galaxy M51
1h23
157. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022
1h25
158. TCL 40R 5G
1h25
159. Vivo Y20s
1h25
160. Motorola Moto G62 5G
1h26
161. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G
1h28
162. Samsung Galaxy A13 5G
1h30
163. Nokia G42 5G
1h33
164. Sony Xperia 10 IV
1h45
165. Wiko Power U30
1h47
166. Realme C21
1h50
167. Oppo A54 5G
1h51
168. Xiaomi Redmi 9
1h52
169. Motorola Moto G9 Power
1h53
170. Realme C11
1h56
171. TCL 406
2h02
172. Wiko Power U20
2h22
BATTERY
Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking
Charging Time 0-80%
13th
1. Xiaomi 12 Pro
0h21
2. Honor Magic4 Pro
0h22
3. OnePlus 9 Pro
0h22
4. Oppo Find X3 Pro
0h23
5. Xiaomi 13 Pro
0h23
6. Oppo Find X5 Pro
0h23
7. Oppo Find X6 Pro
0h24
8. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
0h24
9. Oppo Find X5
0h25
10. OnePlus 10 Pro
0h26
11. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
0h28
12. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
0h28
13. Honor Magic6 Pro
0h29
14. Huawei P60 Pro
0h29
15. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
0h29
16. Honor Magic Vs
0h29
17. Huawei P50 Pro
0h30
18. Asus ROG Phone 6
0h35
19. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
0h37
20. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
0h37
21. Honor Magic5 Pro
0h37
22. Asus ROG Phone 7
0h37
23. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
0h37
24. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra
0h38
25. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
0h39
26. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
0h40
27. Oppo Find N2 Flip
0h45
28. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
0h46
29. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
0h48
30. Google Pixel 8 Pro
0h49
31. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
0h49
32. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
0h51
33. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
0h51
34. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
0h52
35. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
0h54
36. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
0h54
37. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
0h56
38. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
0h56
39. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
0h57
40. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
0h57
41. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
0h57
42. Google Pixel Fold
1h00
43. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
1h01
44. Google Pixel 6 Pro
1h02
45. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
1h03
46. Google Pixel 7 Pro
1h03
47. Sony Xperia 1 IV
1h05
48. Sony Xperia 5 IV
1h05
49. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
1h06
Power consumption and battery level during full charge
The charging curves, in wired and wireless (if available) showing the evolution of the battery level indicator as well as the power consumption in watts during the stages of charging toward full capacity.
Power consumption and battery level during wireless full charge
The charging curves, in wired and wireless (if available) showing the evolution of the battery level indicator as well as the power consumption in watts during the stages of charging toward full capacity.
Time to full charge
Time to full charge

Quick boost

158

Honor Magic6 Pro

212

Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
i

With the phone at different charge levels (20%, 40%, 60%, 80%), Quick boost tests measure the amount of charge the battery receives after being plugged in for 5 minutes. The chart here compares the average autonomy gain from a quick 5-minute charge.

Average autonomy gain for a 5 minute charge (wired)

Efficiency

140

Honor Magic6 Pro

154

Oppo Reno6 5G
i
How Efficiency score is composed

The DXOMARK power efficiency score consists of two sub-scores, Charge up and Discharge rate, both of which combine data obtained during robot-based typical usage scenario, calibrated tests and charging evaluation, taking into consideration the device’s battery capacity. DXOMARK calculate the annual power consumption of the product, shown on below graph, which is representative of the overall efficiency during a charge and when in use.

Learn more about how we test battery
Annual Consumption Honor Magic6 Pro
4.1 kWh
Efficient
Good
Bad
Inefficient

Charge up

121

Honor Magic6 Pro

205

Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro
i

The charge up sub-score is a combination of four factors: the overall efficiency of a full charge, related to how much energy you need to fill up the battery compared to the energy that the battery can provide; the efficiency of the travel adapter when it comes to transferring power from an outlet to your phone; the residual consumption when your phone is fully charged and still plugged into the charger; and the residual consumption of the charger itself, when the smartphone is disconnected from it. The chart here below shows the overall efficiency of a full charge in %.

Overall charge efficiency

Discharge

150

Honor Magic6 Pro

194

Apple iPhone 14 Pro
i

The discharge subscore rates the speed of a battery’s discharge during a test, which is independent of the battery’s capacity. It is the ratio of a battery’s capacity divided by its autonomy. A small-capacity battery could have the same autonomy as a large-capacity battery, indicating that the device is well-optimized, with a low discharge rate.

Average discharge current

The post Honor Magic6 Pro Battery test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic6-pro-battery-test/feed/ 0 Honor Magic6 Pro Charging Time Charging Time Charging Time Quick Boost BATTERY BATTERY Light Usage Moderate Usage Intense Usage BATTERY BATTERY Wired Wireless BATTERY BATTERY Wired Wireless Wired Wireless Honor Magic6 Pro Audio test https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic6-pro-audio-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic6-pro-audio-test/#respond Sun, 25 Feb 2024 12:00:24 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=165966 We put the Honor Magic6 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Audio test suite to measure its performance both at recording sound using its built-in microphones, and at playing audio back through its speakers. In this review, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases. Overview Key [...]

The post Honor Magic6 Pro Audio test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Honor Magic6 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Audio test suite to measure its performance both at recording sound using its built-in microphones, and at playing audio back through its speakers.
In this review, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview


Key audio specifications include:

  • Two speakers (Top front under screen, bottom side)
  • No jack audio output

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Honor Magic6 Pro
Honor Magic6 Pro
155
audio
152
Playback
Timbre
147

158

Dynamics
137

149

Spatial
157

162

Volume
142

162

Artifacts
98

157

160
Recording
Timbre
146

147

Dynamics
141

146

Spatial
151

159

Volume
155

170

Artifacts
145

Best

Background
154

166

AUDIO
Position in Global Ranking
2nd
1. Black Shark 5 Pro
161
2. Asus ROG Phone 6
155
2. Honor Magic6 Pro
155
4. Asus ROG Phone 5
151
5. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders
149
5. Black Shark 4S Pro
149
5. Black Shark 4 Pro
149
5. Honor Magic3 Pro+
149
9. Asus ROG Phone 7
148
10. Xiaomi Mi 10 S
147
11. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
144
11. Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
144
13. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
143
14. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
142
14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
142
14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
142
14. Google Pixel 8 Pro
142
18. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
141
18. Apple iPhone 15
141
18. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
141
18. Apple iPhone 14
141
18. Huawei P60 Pro
141
23. Apple iPhone 12
140
23. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
140
23. Google Pixel 8
140
23. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
140
23. Xiaomi 13 Pro
140
28. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
139
28. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
139
28. Apple iPhone 12 mini
139
28. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
139
32. Apple iPhone 13
138
32. Asus ROG Phone 3
138
32. Google Pixel 6 Pro
138
32. Honor Magic5 Pro
138
32. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+
138
32. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE
138
38. Apple iPhone 13 mini
137
38. Google Pixel 7 Pro
137
38. Google Pixel 6
137
38. Honor Magic Vs
137
38. Honor Magic4 Pro
137
38. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
137
44. Google Pixel 6a
135
44. OnePlus Open
135
44. Oppo Find N2
135
44. Xiaomi 14
135
48. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
134
48. Vivo X100 Pro
134
48. Xiaomi 13
134
51. Google Pixel Fold
133
51. Huawei Mate 20 X
133
51. Lenovo Legion Y90
133
51. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
133
51. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
133
51. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
133
51. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
133
51. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
133
51. Vivo X90 Pro
133
60. Google Pixel 7a
132
60. Vivo X Fold
132
60. Vivo X90 Pro+
132
63. Apple iPhone XS Max
131
63. Asus Zenfone 10
131
63. Oppo Find X2 Pro
131
63. Oppo Find N2 Flip
131
67. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
130
67. Xiaomi Mix Fold 3
130
69. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
129
69. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
129
69. Xiaomi 12S Ultra
129
69. Xiaomi 12 Pro
129
73. OnePlus 11
128
73. Oppo Find X6 Pro
128
73. Oppo Find X5 Pro
128
73. POCO F4 GT
128
73. Realme GT Neo 5 (240W)
128
73. Xiaomi Redmi K50 Gaming
128
73. Xiaomi 13T
128
73. Xiaomi 11T Pro
128
81. Oppo Find X6
127
81. Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G
127
81. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G
127
81. Xiaomi 12T Pro
127
85. Apple iPhone 11
126
85. Motorola Razr 40 Ultra
126
85. OnePlus 10T 5G
126
85. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G
126
85. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G
126
85. Xiaomi 12T
126
85. Xiaomi 11T
126
92. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
125
92. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G
125
92. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)
125
95. Lenovo Legion Phone 2 Pro
124
96. Google Pixel 7
123
96. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G
123
98. Apple iPhone SE (2022)
122
98. Apple iPhone SE (2020)
122
98. Xiaomi 13T Pro
122
98. Xiaomi 12
122
102. OnePlus 9 Pro
121
102. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
121
102. Sony Xperia 1 IV
121
102. Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
121
106. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
120
106. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Snapdragon)
120
106. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)
120
109. Asus ROG Phone 2
119
109. Huawei P50 Pro
119
109. OnePlus 9
119
109. OnePlus 8
119
109. POCO F5 Pro
119
109. Xiaomi Redmi K40 Gaming
119
109. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
119
116. Realme GT Neo 3
118
116. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
118
116. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
118
116. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
118
116. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)
118
116. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)
118
122. Asus Zenfone 8
117
122. Google Pixel 4
117
122. OnePlus 10 Pro
117
122. OnePlus 8 Pro
117
122. Vivo iQOO 9 Pro
117
127. Motorola Edge 40 Pro
116
127. Motorola Edge+
116
127. Realme GT Neo 2 5G
116
127. Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
116
127. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
116
127. Xiaomi Redmi K40 Pro+
116
127. Xiaomi Mi 11
116
134. Motorola Edge 30 Pro
115
134. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G
115
134. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
115
134. Xiaomi Mi 11i
115
138. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold2 5G
114
138. Vivo iQOO 7 Legend
114
140. Google Pixel 5
113
140. LG V60 ThinQ 5G
113
140. OnePlus 7 Pro
113
140. Samsung Galaxy S20+
113
140. Samsung Galaxy S10+
113
140. Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ 5G (Exynos)
113
140. Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ (Exynos)
113
140. Sony Xperia 1 III
113
148. Nubia RedMagic 6 Pro
112
148. Nubia Red Magic 5S
112
148. Realme GT 5G
112
148. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G
112
152. Oppo A78 5G
111
152. Sony Xperia 5 IV
111
154. Oppo Find X3 Pro
110
155. Honor 70
109
155. Huawei Mate 30 Pro 5G
109
155. Oppo Find X5
109
155. POCO X3 NFC
109
155. Realme GT 2 Pro
109
155. Vivo X70 Pro+
109
155. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra
109
162. Huawei Mate 30 Pro
108
162. Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
108
162. Oppo Find X3 Neo
108
162. Realme X2 Pro
108
166. Sony Xperia 5 V
107
167. Honor 90
106
167. Nothing Phone(1)
106
167. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G
106
167. Oppo A77 5G
106
171. Lenovo Legion Phone Pro
105
171. Nothing Phone (2)
105
171. Nubia RedMagic 7 Pro
105
171. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G
105
175. Honor V30 Pro
104
175. Oppo Reno8 5G
104
175. Oppo Reno5 Pro+ 5G
104
178. Black Shark 3 Pro
103
178. Nubia RedMagic 8 Pro
103
178. Oppo Find X5 Lite
103
178. Sony Xperia 1 II
103
182. Huawei P40 Pro
102
182. Motorola Edge 20 Pro
102
182. Oppo Reno6 5G
102
185. Motorola Razr
101
186. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
97
186. Xiaomi Mi CC9 Pro Premium Edition
97
188. Black Shark 2 Pro
96
188. Honor 20 Pro
96
188. Oppo Find X3 Lite
96
188. Vivo X51 5G
96
192. LG G8 ThinQ
95
192. Sony Xperia 10 IV
95
194. Nubia Red Magic 3S
94
195. Fairphone 4
93
195. Sony Xperia 1
93
195. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)
93
198. Fairphone 5
92
199. Vivo X60 Pro+
91
200. Nokia 7.2
87
201. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
86
AUDIO
Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking
1st
1. Asus ROG Phone 6
155
1. Honor Magic6 Pro
155
3. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders
149
3. Honor Magic3 Pro+
149
5. Asus ROG Phone 7
148
6. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
144
6. Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
144
8. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
143
9. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
142
9. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
142
9. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
142
9. Google Pixel 8 Pro
142
13. Apple iPhone 15 Plus
141
13. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
141
13. Huawei P60 Pro
141
16. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
140
16. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
140
16. Xiaomi 13 Pro
140
19. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
139
19. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
139
19. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
139
22. Asus ROG Phone 3
138
22. Google Pixel 6 Pro
138
22. Honor Magic5 Pro
138
22. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+
138
26. Google Pixel 7 Pro
137
26. Honor Magic Vs
137
26. Honor Magic4 Pro
137
26. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
137
30. OnePlus Open
135
30. Oppo Find N2
135
32. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4
134
32. Vivo X100 Pro
134
34. Google Pixel Fold
133
34. Huawei Mate 20 X
133
34. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5
133
34. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
133
34. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
133
34. Vivo X90 Pro
133
40. Vivo X Fold
132
40. Vivo X90 Pro+
132
42. Apple iPhone XS Max
131
42. Oppo Find X2 Pro
131
42. Oppo Find N2 Flip
131
45. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4
130
45. Xiaomi Mix Fold 3
130
47. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5
129
47. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)
129
47. Xiaomi 12S Ultra
129
47. Xiaomi 12 Pro
129
51. Oppo Find X6 Pro
128
51. Oppo Find X5 Pro
128
53. Oppo Find X6
127
54. Motorola Razr 40 Ultra
126
55. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
125
55. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)
125
57. OnePlus 9 Pro
121
57. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)
121
57. Sony Xperia 1 IV
121
57. Xiaomi Mix Fold 2
121
61. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
120
62. Asus ROG Phone 2
119
62. Huawei P50 Pro
119
62. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
119
65. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
118
65. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
118
67. OnePlus 10 Pro
117
67. OnePlus 8 Pro
117
69. Motorola Edge 40 Pro
116
69. Motorola Edge+
116
69. Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
116
69. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
116
73. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
115
74. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold2 5G
114
75. Samsung Galaxy S20+
113
75. Samsung Galaxy S10+
113
75. Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ 5G (Exynos)
113
75. Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ (Exynos)
113
75. Sony Xperia 1 III
113
80. Sony Xperia 5 IV
111
81. Oppo Find X3 Pro
110
82. Huawei Mate 30 Pro 5G
109
82. Oppo Find X5
109
82. Vivo X70 Pro+
109
85. Huawei Mate 30 Pro
108
86. Sony Xperia 5 V
107
87. Lenovo Legion Phone Pro
105
88. Black Shark 3 Pro
103
88. Sony Xperia 1 II
103
90. Huawei P40 Pro
102
91. Motorola Razr
101
92. LG G8 ThinQ
95
93. Sony Xperia 1
93
94. Vivo X60 Pro+
91

Playback

Pros

  • Strong overall performance, especially for timbre, spatial and volume
  • Snappy attacks, punchy sound
  • Great performance when gaming

Cons

  • Slight boost in the low end can sound resonant
  • Moderate distortion
  • Bass precision could be better

Recording

Pros

  • Excellent audio zoom, well-controlled wind noise
  • Natural and pleasant timbre, for both main signal and background
  • Very loud recordings, excellent signal-to-noise ratio
  • Consistent performance across use cases

Cons

  • Maximum loudness has some room for improvement
  • Very subtle distortion and compression at high-SPL

With a DXOMARK Audio score of 155, the Honor Magic6 Pro is among the very best devices tested to date under our Audio protocol, delivering strong results across all playback and recording sub-tests. In playback our experts particularly liked the Magic6 Pro’s performance for timbre, spatial and volume. Attacks were snappy and the sound quite punchy overall. A slight boost in the low end brought more depth, although it could also lead to some resonances or light distortion, which could also deteriorate bass precision. Playback quality was especially good when playing games, but results were also excellent for watching movies and music consumption.

In recording tests, the audio zoom feature is excellent and very effective, while wind noise was very well under control. The timbre was pleasantly natural for both the main signal and the background, in all use cases. In addition, recordings were very loud, with an excellent signal-to-noise ratio. Recording with the main camera delivered the best results, although the performance was also very consistent across all our use cases.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Audio tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone audio reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective tests and undertake more than 20 hours of perceptual evaluation under controlled lab conditions.
(For more details about our Playback protocol, click here; for more details about our Recording protocol, click here.)
The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations under the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

Playback

152

Honor Magic6 Pro

163

Black Shark 5 Pro
i
How Audio Playback score is composed

DXOMARK engineers test playback through the smartphone speakers, whose performance is evaluated in our labs and in real-life conditions, using default apps and settings.

Learn more about how we test audio playback
Listen to the tested smartphone’s playback performance in this comparison with some of its competitors:
Honor Magic6 Pro
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
Huawei Mate 60 Pro +
Recordings of the smartphones playing some of our music tracks at 60 LAeq in an anechoic environment by 2 microphones in A-B configuration, at 30 cm
Here is how the Honor Magic6 Pro performs in playback use cases compared to its competitors:
Playback use-cases scores

Timbre

147

Honor Magic6 Pro

158

Black Shark 5 Pro
i

The Timbre score represents how well a phone reproduces sound across the audible tonal range and takes into account bass, midrange, treble, tonal balance, and volume dependency. It is the most important attribute for playback.

In our playback tests, timbre was very good across all use cases and volumes, offering an excellent balance between treble, midrange and bass, with great consistency. Treble sounded very natural and was accompanied by a pleasant and warm midrange. Bass was quite deep and powerful but left some room for improvement, as the boost in low end could bring some subtle resonances or distortion. Overall, timbre worked extremely well for gaming with the phone but it was also very good for watching movies and listening to music.

Music playback frequency response
A 1/12 octave frequency response graph, which measures the volume of each frequency emitted by the smartphone when playing a pure-sine wave in an anechoic environment.

Dynamics

137

Honor Magic6 Pro

149

Black Shark 5 Pro
i

The Dynamics score measures the accuracy of changes in the energy level of sound sources, for example how precisely a bass note is reproduced or the impact sound from drums.

Dynamics results were very good, especially for attack and punch. Attack was very snappy, especially at nominal volume, but also with distortion well under control at maximum volume, the transients managed to stand out very well. Punch was remarkably good thanks to the solid low midrange energy. Results for bass precision were not quite on the same high level, however, as the bass envelope was impaired by subtle distortion, and potentially by the resonance mentioned previously in the timbre section as well.


Spatial

157

Honor Magic6 Pro

162

Black Shark 5 Pro
i

The sub-attributes for spatial tests include pinpointing a specific sound's location, its positional balance, distance, and wideness.

The device put in an excellent performance in the spatial category as well, thanks notably to a very wide sound scene. The stereo image, perfectly centered, also rotated adequately with device orientation, even adapting to portrait orientation, adding to the user experience. Individual sound sources were very easy to locate within the sound scene, and both distance and depth rendition were excellent in our tests.


Volume

142

Honor Magic6 Pro

162

Black Shark 5 Pro
i

The Volume score represents the overall loudness of a smartphone and how smoothly volume increases and decreases based on user input.

The Honor Magic6 Pro provided very good consistency across the volume scale. Tuning of the minimum volume level was excellent, offering good intelligibility of soft sections in highly dynamic audio content, such as classical music, without being too loud. The maximum setting was tuned nicely as well, providing excellent loudness.

Here are a few sound pressure levels (SPL) measured when playing our sample recordings of hip-hop and classical music at maximum volume:
Hip-Hop Classical
Honor Magic6 Pro 72.1 dBA 68.7 dBA
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max 75.1 dBA 72.3 dBA
Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ 74.9 dBA 71.5 dBA
The following graph shows the gradual changes in volume going from minimum to maximum. We expect these changes to be consistent across the range, so that all volume steps correspond to users’ expectations:

Music volume consistency
This line graph shows the relative loudness of playback relative to the user selected volume step, measured at different volume steps with a correlated pink noise in an anechoic box recorded in axis at 0.20 meter.

Artifacts

98

Honor Magic6 Pro

157

Asus ROG Phone 5
i

The Artifacts score measures the extent to which the sound is affected by various types of distortion. The higher the score, the less the disturbances in the sound are noticeable. Distortion can occur because of sound processing in the device and because of the quality of the speakers.

Unwanted artifacts in audio playback were overall well managed on the Magic6 Pro. Distortion was well under control, with only some moderate distortion noticeable, especially in the upper low end. Compression was not an issue but our testers noted some very subtle volume fluctuations at soft volume levels.

Playback Total Harmonic Distortion (Maximum Volume)
This graph shows the Total Harmonic Distortion and Noise over the hearable frequency range.
It represents the distortion and noise of the device playing our test signal (0 dB Fs, Sweep Sine in an anechoic box at 40 cm) at the device's maximum volume.

Recording

160

Honor Magic6 Pro

Best

i
How Audio Recording score is composed

DXOMARK engineers test recording by evaluating the recorded files on reference audio equipment. Those recordings are done in our labs and in real-life conditions, using default apps and settings.

Learn more about how we test audio recording
Here is how the Honor Magic6 Pro performs in recording use cases compared to its competitors:
Recording use-cases scores

Timbre

146

Honor Magic6 Pro

147

Honor Magic3 Pro+
i

The Timbre score represents how well a phone captures sounds across the audible tonal range and takes into account bass, midrange, treble, and tonal balance. It is the most important attribute for recording.

Timbre was excellent in the Magic6 Pro recording tests, with a very flat frequency response and great tonal balance, that was consistent across use cases. Recordings sounded pleasant and natural. Midrange was notably excellent, and so was treble, although it could sound even brighter arguably. In the Concert use case, the device managed to perform quite well under the high SPL delivered by the lab speakers, as tonal balance was not drowned out by an excess of low end, and treble was not aggressive.

Life video frequency response
A 1/12 octave frequency response graph, which measures the volume of each frequency captured by the smartphone when recording a pure-sine wave in an anechoic environment.

Dynamics

141

Honor Magic6 Pro

146

Black Shark 5 Pro
i

The Dynamics score measures the accuracy of changes in the energy level of sound sources, for example how precisely a voice's plosives (the p's, t's and k's, for example) are reproduced. The score also considers the Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR), for example how loud the main voice is compared to the background noise.

Recording dynamics was very good as well, thanks to an excellent signal-to-noise ratio. In our tests, the device did a great job at reducing background noise without impairing the main signal. Our testers found the background to be unintrusive yet natural. Compression could be noticed on occasion, for example on shouting voices, but it was well under control and didn’t impair envelope.


Spatial

151

Honor Magic6 Pro

159

Vivo X Fold
i

The sub-attributes for spatial tests include pinpointing a specific sound's location, its positional balance, distance, and wideness on the recorded audio files.

The recorded sound scene was very wide, with good localizability of individual sound sources. Distance rendition was very good as well.

Recording directivity
Directivity graph of the smartphone when recording test signals using the camera app, with the main camera. It represents the acoustic energy (in dB) over the angle of incidence of the sound source. (Normalized to the angle 0°, in front of the device.)

Volume

155

Honor Magic6 Pro

170

Black Shark 5 Pro
i

The Volume score represents how loud audio is normalized on the recorded files and the how the device handles loud environments, such as electronic concerts, when recording.

Recording loudness was excellent. The Honor Magic6 Pro is the loudest device tested to date, both in the lab and in our real-life tests.

Here are the sound levels recorded in the audio and video files, measured in LUFS (Loudness Unit Full Scale); as a reference, we expect loudness levels to be above -24 LUFS for recorded content:
Meeting Life Video Selfie Video Memo
Honor Magic6 Pro -21.4 LUFS -16.9 LUFS -16.2 LUFS -18 LUFS
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max -24.9 LUFS -22.1 LUFS -20.5 LUFS -19.2 LUFS
Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ -25.4 LUFS -20.2 LUFS -18.9 LUFS -21.4 LUFS

Artifacts

145

Honor Magic6 Pro

Best

i

The Artifacts score measures the extent to which the recorded sounds are affected by various types of distortions. The higher the score, the less the disturbances in the sound are noticeable. Distortions can occur because of sound processing in the device and the quality of the microphones, as well as user handling, such as how the phone is held.

Recording artifacts were well under control. Compression was slightly noticeable but not problematic overall. Our experts observed some slight distortion when recording at high sound pressure levels but it was well within acceptable limits. The device also dealt well with microphone occlusions.

In this audio comparison, you can listen to the way this smartphone handles wind noise relative to its competitors:

Recordings of a voice sample with light background noise, facing a turbulent wind of 5 m/s

Background

154

Honor Magic6 Pro

166

Black Shark 5 Pro
i

Background evaluates how natural the various sounds around a voice blend into the video recording file. For example, when recording a speech at an event, the background should not interfere with the main voice, yet it should provide some context of the surroundings.

Recording background was excellent, unintrusive, with a pleasant brilliance as well as a homogenous and natural timbre.

The post Honor Magic6 Pro Audio test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic6-pro-audio-test/feed/ 0 Honor Magic6 Pro Best AUDIO AUDIO Best Best Honor Magic6 Pro Selfie test https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic6-pro-selfie-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic6-pro-selfie-test/#respond Sun, 25 Feb 2024 11:04:31 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=166647&preview=true&preview_id=166647 We put the Honor Magic6 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Selfie test suite to measure its performance in photo and video from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing [...]

The post Honor Magic6 Pro Selfie test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> We put the Honor Magic6 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Selfie test suite to measure its performance in photo and video from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key front camera specifications:

  • 50MP sensor
  • f/2.0-aperture lens
  • Autofocus
  • 4K video at 30fps, 1080p at 30/60fps (4k at 30 fps tested)

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Honor Magic6 Pro
Honor Magic6 Pro
151
selfie
149
Photo
Exposure
90

97

Color
97

106

Focus
105

Best

Texture
73

79

Noise
93

94

Artifacts
78

91

Flash
90

93

Bokeh
80

Best

155
Video
Exposure
84

87

Color
87

90

Focus
88

92

Texture
89

97

Noise
80

83

Artifacts
87

92

Stabilization
75

82

SELFIE
Position in Global Ranking
1st
1. Honor Magic6 Pro
151
2. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
149
2. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
149
4. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
145
4. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
145
4. Google Pixel 8 Pro
145
4. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
145
8. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
144
8. Apple iPhone 14
144
8. Huawei P50 Pro
144
11. Google Pixel 7 Pro
142
11. Huawei Mate 40 Pro
142
13. Huawei P40 Pro
141
13. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
141
15. Google Pixel 7a
140
16. Google Pixel 7
138
16. Google Pixel 6 Pro
138
18. Asus ZenFone 7 Pro
137
18. Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
137
20. Huawei nova 6 5G
136
20. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
136
22. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
135
22. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
135
22. Samsung Galaxy Note20 (Exynos)
135
25. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
134
25. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
134
25. Apple iPhone 13 mini
134
25. Apple iPhone 13
134
25. Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ 5G (Exynos)
134
30. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
133
31. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
132
31. Apple iPhone 12 Pro
132
31. Apple iPhone 12 mini
132
31. Apple iPhone 12
132
31. Asus ZenFone 6
132
31. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)
132
37. Samsung Galaxy S10 5G (Exynos)
130
37. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
130
39. Google Pixel 6
129
39. Samsung Galaxy S10+ (Exynos)
129
41. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
128
42. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)
127
43. Google Pixel 5
126
44. Vivo X90 Pro+
125
44. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
125
46. Google Pixel 4
124
46. Huawei Mate 30 Pro
124
48. Google Pixel 3
123
48. Honor Magic5 Pro
123
48. OnePlus 8 Pro
123
51. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
122
51. Apple iPhone 11
122
51. Honor Magic4 Ultimate
122
54. Xiaomi 11T Pro
121
55. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)
119
56. Huawei P30 Pro
118
57. Oppo Find X5 Pro
116
57. Xiaomi Mi 10T Pro 5G
116
59. Vivo X70 Pro+
115
59. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
115
59. Xiaomi 11T
115
62. Xiaomi 12S Ultra
114
63. OnePlus 7 Pro
113
64. Honor 20 Pro
112
64. Huawei Mate 30 Pro 5G
112
64. Xiaomi Mi 11
112
67. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
111
68. Apple iPhone SE (2020)
110
69. Xiaomi Mi MIX 3
109
69. Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
109
71. OnePlus 8T
107
71. Samsung Galaxy A71
107
73. Oppo Reno6 5G
106
74. Apple iPhone XS Max
105
75. Vivo X51 5G
103
76. Honor V30 Pro
102
76. Sony Xperia 5
102
78. Nokia 7.2
100
78. Sony Xperia 1
100
78. Xiaomi Mi CC9 Pro Premium Edition
100
81. Google Pixel 2
99
82. Oppo Find X2 Pro
97
83. Huawei Mate 20 Pro
96
83. Realme X2 Pro
96
85. Oppo Reno4 Pro 5G
95
86. Lenovo Z6 Pro
94
86. Samsung Galaxy S8
94
88. Huawei P20 Pro
91
89. Apple iPhone X
89
89. Meitu T9
89
91. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
83
92. Meitu V6
77
93. ZTE Axon 20 5G
31
94. Intex Aqua Selfie
25
SELFIE
Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking
1st
1. Honor Magic6 Pro
151
2. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max
149
2. Apple iPhone 15 Pro
149
4. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max
145
4. Apple iPhone 14 Pro
145
4. Google Pixel 8 Pro
145
4. Huawei Mate 50 Pro
145
8. Apple iPhone 14 Plus
144
8. Huawei P50 Pro
144
10. Google Pixel 7 Pro
142
10. Huawei Mate 40 Pro
142
12. Huawei P40 Pro
141
12. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)
141
14. Google Pixel 6 Pro
138
15. Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
137
16. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
136
17. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
135
17. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)
135
17. Samsung Galaxy Note20 (Exynos)
135
20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max
134
20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro
134
20. Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ 5G (Exynos)
134
23. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
133
24. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max
132
24. Apple iPhone 12 Pro
132
26. Samsung Galaxy S10 5G (Exynos)
130
26. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)
130
28. Samsung Galaxy S10+ (Exynos)
129
29. Xiaomi 13 Ultra
128
30. Vivo X90 Pro+
125
30. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
125
32. Huawei Mate 30 Pro
124
33. Honor Magic5 Pro
123
33. OnePlus 8 Pro
123
35. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max
122
35. Honor Magic4 Ultimate
122
37. Huawei P30 Pro
118
38. Oppo Find X5 Pro
116
39. Vivo X70 Pro+
115
39. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra
115
41. Xiaomi 12S Ultra
114
42. Huawei Mate 30 Pro 5G
112
43. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip
111
44. Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
109
45. Apple iPhone XS Max
105
46. Sony Xperia 1
100
47. Oppo Find X2 Pro
97
48. Huawei Mate 20 Pro
96
49. Huawei P20 Pro
91
50. Apple iPhone X
89
51. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
83

Pros

  • Accurate target exposure and wide dynamic range
  • Neutral white balance and fairly pleasant color rendering
  • Low noise levels in bright light and indoors
  • Wide depth of field

Cons

  • Slightly strong contrast in backlit scenes
  • Loss of fine detail in low light
  • Sharpness differences between frames in video with motion
  • Artifacts such as hue shift near saturation sometimes visible in outdoor and indoor conditions

The Honor Magic6 Pro delivered an impressive performance in the DXOMARK Selfie test, achieving the highest overall score to date. The new model’s updated front camera hardware undoubtedly contributed to this outstanding result and helped achieve noticeable improvements over the predecessor. While the Magic5 Pro had to make do with a 12MP image sensor and f/2.4-aperture lens, the new device comes with a 50MP resolution and a wider f/2 aperture, offering significantly better light collection capabilities. In addition, the new Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 chipset provides plenty of image processing power and the addition of an autofocus system allows for precise focusing at all subject distances.

In our tests, the Honor Magic6 Pro delivered the most well-rounded performance to date, achieving excellent results across all sub-attributes. It was even better than the previous No. 1, the Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max, in most test areas, except exposure and color in both photo and video. When comparing the two front-runner devices, we can see that the iPhone generally provides better contrast and more vibrant colors. However, the iPhone images also come with significant amounts of noise. The Honor Magic6 Pro, on the other hand, does particularly well for noise, delivering an impressive trade-off between texture preservation and noise reduction.

Please note that the Magic6 Pro was tested in SDR format for both photo and video as no HDR format is available when shooting with the front camera. The Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max was tested in HDR mode.

Honor Magic 6 Pro Selfie Scores vs Ultra-Premium
This graph compares overall photo and video DXOMARK Selfie scores between tested devices and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Selfie tests: For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 1,500 test images both in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the front camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the user’s needs and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as close-up and group selfies. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 1 to 1,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K. For more information about the DXOMARK Selfie test protocol, click here. More details on how we score smartphone cameras are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses .Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us on how to receive a full report.

Photo

149

Honor Magic6 Pro

Best

Honor Magic 6 Pro Photo scores vs Ultra-Premium
The photo tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Range of focus and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses.

In our front camera tests, the Honor Magic6 Pro achieved the best score for photo to date, significantly surpassing its predecessor Magic5 Pro. The wide depth of field and associated ability to keep all subjects in focus were a major strength. In addition, the camera managed to keep noise levels down in most test conditions, delivering a good trade-off between texture and noise. While exposure and color rendering were not quite as nice as on the iPhone 15 Pro Max, the Honor was still among the best in these test areas. The natural bokeh effect was another favorite of our testers, with the Honor achieving the best results we have seen to date for this test. On the downside, some image artifacts could be noticeable, especially in difficult backlit scenes or low light.

Honor Magic6 Pro – Pleasant color rendering, accurate target exposure and high level of details.

Exposure

90

Honor Magic6 Pro

97

Apple iPhone 15 Pro
i

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness of the face(s) in various use cases and light conditions. Other factors evaluated are the contrast and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting consecutive images in a row.

When compared to the predecessor Honor Magic5 Pro, the Magic6 Pro delivered better face contrast, especially in difficult backlit scenes. This said, it was still not quite on the same level as the Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max in this respect. The camera was also capable of capturing a wide dynamic range.

Honor Magic6 Pro – Slightly strong contrast, slight highlight clipping on face
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Pleasant contrast

Color

97

Honor Magic6 Pro

106

Google Pixel 8 Pro
i

Color is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability.

The Magic6 Pro generally captured images with a neutral white balance but slight color casts could be noticeable in some scenes. Skin tones and color rendering were pleasant overall, but in some scenes, colors looked slightly desaturated. Our testers sometimes also found the skin tones on dark-skinned models to be slightly too red.

Honor Magic6 Pro – Slightly desaturated colors, occasional slightly cold cast
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Bright and vivid colors, natural skin tones

Focus

105

Honor Magic6 Pro

Best

i

Autofocus tests evaluate the accuracy of the focus on the subject’s face, the repeatability of an accurate focus, and the depth of field. While a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single-subject selfie or close-up shot, it can be problematic in specific conditions such as group selfies; both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from 30cm to 150cm, and in low light to outdoor conditions.

Despite the wide f/2.0 aperture, the Honor Magic6 Pro offers a wide depth of field. The addition of an autofocus system allows for precise adjustment of the focus point. As a result, in our tests, the camera was capable of keeping all faces in group scenes in focus.

Honor Magic6 Pro - Depth of field
Honor Magic6 Pro - Background face (and all other faces) in focus, wide depth of field
Apple Iphone 15 Pro Max - Depth of field
Apple Iphone 15 Pro Max - Background face is out of focus, slightly limited depth of field

Texture

73

Honor Magic6 Pro

79

Asus ZenFone 7 Pro
i

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in facial features, such as the eyes. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC) and the Dead Leaves chart.

The Magic6 Pro front camera captured fairly good detail in daylight and when shooting under indoor conditions. However, a loss of detail was noticeable in low light. Our testers also observed some unnatural detail rendering in some scenes, especially in low light.

Honor Magic6 Pro - Detail
Honor Magic6 Pro - Good detail but unnatural detail rendering on hair
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Detail
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Acceptable detail
Texture acutance evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of texture acutance with the level of lux for two holding conditions. The texture acutance is measured on the Dead Leaves chart in the Close-up Dead Leaves setup.

Noise

93

Honor Magic6 Pro

94

Huawei Mate 50 Pro
i

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, and structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the DXOMARK Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

The Honor Magic6 Pro managed to maintain a quite good trade-off between texture and noise across all light conditions, outperforming the iPhone 15 Pro Max in this respect. The difference between the two cameras was most noticeable in low light, where the Honor managed visibly lower noise levels.

Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the Close-up Dead Leaves setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Honor Magic6 Pro - Outdoor noise
Honor Magic6 Pro - Well-controlled noise on face
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Outdoor noise
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Fine luminance noise on face
Honor Magic6 Pro - Low light noise
Honor Magic6 Pro - Slight noise
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Low light noise
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Noise

Artifacts

78

Honor Magic6 Pro

91

Apple iPhone 15 Pro
i

The artifacts evaluation looks at lens shading, chromatic aberrations, distortion measurement on the Dot chart and MTF, and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab. Particular attention is paid to ghosting, quantization, halos, and hue shifts on the face among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Our experts found some noticeable artifacts in the Magic6 Pro’s image output, including color quantization and face rendering artifacts. While the camera captured high levels of detail on the eyes and on the edges of facial features, skin texture was sometimes rendered unnaturally. Color quantization could be quite noticeable, especially in low light. The testers also observed a loss of sharpness towards the edges of the frame, as well as a hue shift close to clipped areas.

Main photo artifacts penalties

Bokeh

80

Honor Magic6 Pro

Best

i

Bokeh is tested in one dedicated mode, usually portrait or aperture mode, and analyzed by visually inspecting all the images captured in the lab and in natural conditions. The goal is to reproduce portrait photography comparable to one taken with a DSLR and a wide aperture. The main image quality attributes paid attention to are depth estimation, artifacts, blur gradient, and the shape of the bokeh blur spotlights. Portrait image quality attributes (exposure, color, texture) are also taken into account.

The Honor Magic6 Pro achieved the best results for Selfie bokeh to date. The Bokeh simulation was very natural, with a pleasant blur and smooth blur transitions. In addition, spotlights in the background were rendered naturally, with high contrast and a well-defined shape.

Honor Magic6 Pro – Good depth estimation, no artifacts
Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Depth estimation artifacts in complex scenes.

Video

155

Honor Magic6 Pro

156

Apple iPhone 15 Pro
i
About DXOMARK Selfie Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the front camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 1 to 1000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Learn more about how we test camera
Honor Magic 6 Pro Video scores vs Ultra-Premium
Video tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, smoothness, and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.

The Honor Magic6 Pro video mode was tested at 4K resolution and 30 frames per second as this configuration delivered the overall best video quality. At these settings, video performance was great across most sub-tests, with high levels of detail and low noise in most conditions. Texture and noise were also the most improved areas over the Magic5 Pro, and the main advantage over the Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max. In addition, dynamic range was wide in most test conditions, and color rendering was pleasant. Like for still images, a wide depth of field helped keep multiple subjects in a scene in focus. Video stabilization was the Honor’s only weakness when compared to its direct rivals in the Ultra Premium segment.

Exposure

84

Honor Magic6 Pro

87

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Video target exposure was accurate in most conditions but sometimes our testers observed some underexposure in low-light clips. Dynamic range was generally wide, but highlight clipping could occur in some bright light scenes.

Honor Magic6 Pro – Accurate target exposure, wide dynamic range with pleasant contrast

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Accurate target exposure, slight clipping on face

Color

87

Honor Magic6 Pro

90

Apple iPhone 15 Pro
i

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness of the face and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed. Image-quality color analysis looks at skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Our testers found the Magic6 Pro’s video color rendering to be nice and pleasant when recording in bright light as well as under indoor lighting. In addition, the camera captured nice skin tones and managed a neutral white balance. However, in more difficult backlit scenes, we observed some color rendering failures and noticeable color casts.

Honor Magic6 Pro – Slight white balance cast, inaccurate skin tones, color fringing on background

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Pleasant color rendering, no cast, natural skin tones

Texture

89

Honor Magic6 Pro

97

Asus ZenFone 6
i

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural video recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of detail on the facial features. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart.

Video clips recorded on the Magic6 Pro front camera in bright conditions offered high levels of texture. In addition, fine detail was preserved well.

Texture acutance evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of texture acutance with the level of lux for two holding conditions. The texture acutance is measured on the Dead Leaves chart in the Close-up Dead Leaves setup.

Noise

80

Honor Magic6 Pro

83

Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
i

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise on faces. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

Both visual noise and temporal noise were fairly well controlled when recording video in bright light. However, noise tended to become noticeable in the background of low-light scenes.

Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

Stabilization

75

Honor Magic6 Pro

82

Apple iPhone 15 Pro
i

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at overall residual motion on the face and the background, smoothness and jellow artifacts, during walk and paning use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

The Magic6 Pro’s video stabilization performed on a very similar level as on the iPhone 15 Pro Max, with some camera shake still noticeable and moderate sharpness differences between frames. On occasion, the Honor Magic6 Pro footage also displayed a slight frame shift.

Honor Magic6 Pro – Camera shake, sharpness differences between frames, slight frame shift

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Sharpness differences between frames

Artifacts

87

Honor Magic6 Pro

92

Apple iPhone 12 mini
i

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as quantization, hue shift, and face-rendering artifacts among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below

Hue shift close to clipped areas and on faces was a common occurrence in the Honor’s video clips during our testing. In low light, our testers also observed some face rendering artifacts.

Main video artifacts penalties

The post Honor Magic6 Pro Selfie test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]> https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic6-pro-selfie-test/feed/ 0 Honor Magic6 Pro Best Best SELFIE SELFIE Best VegetationFair_HonorMagic6Pro_DxOMark_Selfie_05-00 Forbidden_HonorMagic6Pro_DxOMark_Selfie_05-00 VegetationMedium_HonorMagic6Pro_DxOMark_Selfie_05-00 VegetationMedium_AppleiPhone15ProMax_DxOMark_Selfie_05-00 Best Best Grid_HonorMagic6Pro_DxOMark_Selfie_05-00 Grid_AppleiPhone15ProMax_DxOMark_Selfie_05-00