Notebookcheck Logo

Test: Google Pixel XL (sammanfattning)

Bombastisk? Bra specifikationer, en utmärkt kamera och ett stort batteri ska väga upp för den nya Google-lurens höga pris. Är det tillräckligt?
Android Google Pixel Phablet Smartphone Touchscreen
Google Pixel XL 2016 (Pixel Serie)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro 4 x 2.15 GHz, Kryo
Grafikkort
Qualcomm Adreno 530, Kärna: 653 MHz
Minne
4 GB 
, LPDDR4
Skärm
5.50 tum 16:9, 2560 x 1440 pixlar 534 PPI, Kapacitiv pekskärm, 10 beröringspunkter, AMOLED, 2.5D, Corning Gorilla Glass 4, glansig: ja
Hårddisk
32 GB eMMC Flash, 32 GB 
, 25.11 GB ledigt
Anslutningar
1 USB 3.0, Ljudanslutningar: 3.5mm, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensorer: Närhet / ALS || Accelerometer / Gyrometer || Magnetometer || Pixel Imprint – Bakmonterad fingeravtrycksläsare || Barometer || Hallsensor || Android Sensor Hub || Avancerad x-axel-haptik för mer väldefinierad feedback
Nätverk
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 4.2, GSM: Quad-band GSM || UMTS/WCDMA: B 1/2/4/5/8 || CDMA: BC0/BC1/BC10 || FDD LTE: B 1/2/3/4/5/7/8/12/13/17/20/25/26/28/29/30 || TDD LTE: B 41, LTE, GPS
Storlek
höjd x bredd x djup (i mm) 8.5 x 154.7 x 75.7
Batteri
3450 mAh Litiumjon, Batteritid (enligt tillverkaren): 14 tim, Samtalstid 3G (enligt tillverkaren): 32 tim, Standby 3G (enligt tillverkaren): 550 tim
Operativsystem
Android 7.1 Nougat
Camera
Primary Camera: 12 MPix (1.55μm-pixlar, f/2.0 bländare)
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix (1.4µm-pixlar, f/2.4 bländare)
Övrigt
Tangentbord: virtuellt, adapter, 2 USB-kablar, SIM-verktyg, Google Apps, Google Assistant, 24 Månader Garanti, Huvud-SAR: 0,25 W/kg, Kropps-SAR: 0,44 W/kg, USB Typ C, fanless
Vikt
168 g
Pris
899 Kr
Länkar
Google hemsida
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Size Comparison

❌
158.2 mm 77.9 mm 7.3 mm 188 g154.7 mm 75.7 mm 8.5 mm 168 g155.3 mm 75.3 mm 5.19 mm 136 g151.9 mm 78.4 mm 8.3 mm 165 g152.7 mm 74.7 mm 7.35 mm 161 g152.3 mm 75.3 mm 6.98 mm 162 g150.9 mm 72.6 mm 7.7 mm 157 g145.9 mm 71.9 mm 9 mm 161 g148 mm 105 mm 1 mm 1.5 g
Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe (Klaus I211)
485 MBit/s +11%
Google Pixel XL 2016
Adreno 530, SD 821, 32 GB eMMC Flash
435 MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
335 MBit/s -23%
LG G5
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
256 MBit/s -41%
iperf3 receive AX12
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe (Klaus I211)
532 MBit/s +3%
Google Pixel XL 2016
Adreno 530, SD 821, 32 GB eMMC Flash
515 MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
281 MBit/s -45%
LG G5
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
257 MBit/s -50%
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Google Pixel XL
Google Pixel XL
Google Pixel XL
Google Pixel XL
Google Pixel XL
Google Pixel XL

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
click to load images
The Pixel XL takes good panorama photos.
The Pixel XL takes good panorama photos.
385
cd/m²		403
cd/m²		435
cd/m²
384
cd/m²		402
cd/m²		440
cd/m²
379
cd/m²		399
cd/m²		446
cd/m²
Distribution av ljusstyrkan
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Max: 446 cd/m² (Nits) Medel: 408.1 cd/m² Minimum: 6.92 cd/m²
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 85 %
Mitt på batteriet: 402 cd/m²
Kontrast: ∞:1 (Svärta: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 3.2 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
Gamma: 2.19
Google Pixel XL 2016
AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.50		Google Nexus 6P
AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.70		Apple iPhone 7 Plus
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.50		Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
Super AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.50		Huawei P9 Plus
AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.50		Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.70		HTC 10
Super LCD 5, 2560x1440, 5.20
Screen
19%
47%
43%
-20%
10%
14%
Brightness middle
402
363
-10%
557
39%
554
38%
361
-10%
297
-26%
445
11%
Brightness
408
365
-11%
553
36%
552
35%
366
-10%
297
-27%
434
6%
Brightness Distribution
85
90
6%
97
14%
96
13%
87
2%
93
9%
93
9%
Black Level *
0.35
0.36
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
4
2.34
41%
1.4
65%
1.59
60%
5.1
-28%
2.67
33%
2.8
30%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
10.1
3.1
69%
2.56
75%
10
1%
3.98
61%
5.8
43%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
3.2
1.03
68%
1.3
59%
2.01
37%
5.5
-72%
2.81
12%
3.7
-16%
Gamma
2.19 100%
2.23 99%
2.21 100%
2.01 109%
2.24 98%
2.08 106%
2.31 95%
CCT
7037 92%
6429 101%
6667 97%
6321 103%
7388 88%
6379 102%
7164 91%
Contrast
1591
1236
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
63.1
82.12
66.31
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
99.83
99.98
99.79

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ
To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM detected 238.1 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 238.1 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 238.1 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17900 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

Display Response Times

ℹ
Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
   ↔    Response Time Black to White
4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2 ms rise
↘ 2 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 11 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21.5 ms).
   ↔    Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2 ms rise
↘ 2 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 10 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (33.7 ms).
AnTuTu v6 | Geekbench 4.0 | 3DMark | GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | GFXBench 3.0 | GFXBench 3.1 | PCMark for Android | BaseMark OS II | Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal | Basemark X 1.1 | Lightmark | Epic Citadel
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
138641 Points
HTC 10
131866 Points -5%
OnePlus 3
142090 Points +2%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
165399 Points +19%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
128749 Points -7%
Lenovo Moto Z
129197 Points -7%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
94122 Points -32%
Huawei P9
95743 Points -31%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
122513 Points -12%
LG G5
124244 Points -10%
Geekbench 4.0
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
1513 Points
OnePlus 3
1754 Points +16%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
3476 Points +130%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
1840 Points +22%
Lenovo Moto Z
1480 Points -2%
Huawei P9
1755 Points +16%
LG G5
1674 Points +11%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
4167 Points
OnePlus 3
4097 Points -2%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
5630 Points +35%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
5503 Points +32%
Lenovo Moto Z
3946 Points -5%
Huawei P9
4904 Points +18%
LG G5
3833 Points -8%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
3483 Points
OnePlus 3
3595 Points +3%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
3371 Points -3%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
2641 Points -24%
Lenovo Moto Z
3151 Points -10%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
3367 Points -3%
LG G5
3506 Points +1%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
4406 Points
OnePlus 3
4804 Points +9%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
5141 Points +17%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
3071 Points -30%
Lenovo Moto Z
3930 Points -11%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
4688 Points +6%
LG G5
4790 Points +9%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
2009 Points
OnePlus 3
1912 Points -5%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
1528 Points -24%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
1773 Points -12%
Lenovo Moto Z
1860 Points -7%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
1695 Points -16%
LG G5
1809 Points -10%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
2629 Points
OnePlus 3
2823 Points +7%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
2234 Points -15%
Lenovo Moto Z
2363 Points -10%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
2580 Points -2%
LG G5
2593 Points -1%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
2863 Points
OnePlus 3
3249 Points +13%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
2394 Points -16%
Lenovo Moto Z
2588 Points -10%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
3060 Points +7%
LG G5
2952 Points +3%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
2044 Points
OnePlus 3
1935 Points -5%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
1811 Points -11%
Lenovo Moto Z
1813 Points -11%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
1665 Points -19%
LG G5
1819 Points -11%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
55 fps
HTC 10
43 fps -22%
OnePlus 3
60 fps +9%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
57.7 fps +5%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
51 fps -7%
Lenovo Moto Z
53 fps -4%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
18.75 fps -66%
Huawei P9
43 fps -22%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
60 fps +9%
LG G5
47 fps -15%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
91 fps
HTC 10
73 fps -20%
OnePlus 3
89 fps -2%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
92 fps +1%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
81 fps -11%
Lenovo Moto Z
77 fps -15%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
27.11 fps -70%
Huawei P9
40 fps -56%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
91 fps 0%
LG G5
74 fps -19%
GFXBench 3.0
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
30 fps
HTC 10
24 fps -20%
OnePlus 3
46 fps +53%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
55.2 fps +84%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
27 fps -10%
Lenovo Moto Z
26 fps -13%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
11.81 fps -61%
Huawei P9
19 fps -37%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
43 fps +43%
LG G5
30 fps 0%
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
48 fps
HTC 10
39 fps -19%
OnePlus 3
47 fps -2%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
58.7 fps +22%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
38 fps -21%
Lenovo Moto Z
41 fps -15%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
17.54 fps -63%
Huawei P9
18 fps -62%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
44 fps -8%
LG G5
42 fps -12%
GFXBench 3.1
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
17 fps
HTC 10
14 fps -18%
OnePlus 3
30 fps +76%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
41.5 fps +144%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
15 fps -12%
Lenovo Moto Z
15 fps -12%
Huawei P9
11 fps -35%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
29 fps +71%
LG G5
17 fps 0%
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
32 fps
HTC 10
24 fps -25%
OnePlus 3
31 fps -3%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
41.3 fps +29%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
28 fps -12%
Lenovo Moto Z
27 fps -16%
Huawei P9
10 fps -69%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
30 fps -6%
LG G5
31 fps -3%
PCMark for Android - Work performance score (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
4739 Points
HTC 10
5809 Points +23%
OnePlus 3
7101 Points +50%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
4660 Points -2%
Lenovo Moto Z
7637 Points +61%
Huawei P9
7058 Points +49%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
6969 Points +47%
LG G5
5581 Points +18%
BaseMark OS II
Overall (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
2378 Points
HTC 10
2193 Points -8%
OnePlus 3
2496 Points +5%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
3097 Points +30%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
2074 Points -13%
Lenovo Moto Z
2356 Points -1%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
1465 Points -38%
Huawei P9
2025 Points -15%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
2290 Points -4%
LG G5
2079 Points -13%
System (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
3889 Points
HTC 10
2806 Points -28%
OnePlus 3
3537 Points -9%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
6582 Points +69%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
4080 Points +5%
Lenovo Moto Z
3398 Points -13%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
1386 Points -64%
Huawei P9
3930 Points +1%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
2986 Points -23%
LG G5
2925 Points -25%
Memory (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
1677 Points
HTC 10
1772 Points +6%
OnePlus 3
2052 Points +22%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
1319 Points -21%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
2072 Points +24%
Lenovo Moto Z
2190 Points +31%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
1945 Points +16%
Huawei P9
2627 Points +57%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
1983 Points +18%
LG G5
1478 Points -12%
Graphics (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
5017 Points
HTC 10
5009 Points 0%
OnePlus 3
4813 Points -4%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
6875 Points +37%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
2203 Points -56%
Lenovo Moto Z
4321 Points -14%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
2040 Points -59%
Huawei P9
1583 Points -68%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
4335 Points -14%
LG G5
4807 Points -4%
Web (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
977 Points
HTC 10
928 Points -5%
OnePlus 3
1112 Points +14%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
1542 Points +58%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
994 Points +2%
Lenovo Moto Z
959 Points -2%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
837 Points -14%
Huawei P9
1029 Points +5%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
1071 Points +10%
LG G5
900 Points -8%
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
621 Points
HTC 10
608 Points -2%
OnePlus 3
631 Points +2%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
1177 Points +90%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
733 Points +18%
Lenovo Moto Z
542 Points -13%
Huawei P9
328 Points -47%
LG G5
543 Points -13%
Basemark X 1.1
Medium Quality (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
34695 Points
OnePlus 3
Points -100%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
41091 Points +18%
Lenovo Moto Z
41445 Points +19%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
33082 Points -5%
Huawei P9
29662 Points -15%
LG G5
28538 Points -18%
High Quality (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
30724 Points
OnePlus 3
33064 Points +8%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
32273 Points +5%
Lenovo Moto Z
33028 Points +7%
Huawei P9
16610 Points -46%
LG G5
25532 Points -17%
Lightmark - 1920x1080 1080p (sort by value)
OnePlus 3
23.32 fps
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
13.31 fps
Lenovo Moto Z
24.33 fps
Huawei P9
7.9 fps
LG G5
25.26 fps
Epic Citadel - Ultra High Quality (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
56.2 fps
OnePlus 3
59.6 fps +6%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
60 fps +7%
Lenovo Moto Z
59.8 fps +6%
Huawei P9
58.6 fps +4%
LG G5
55.8 fps -1%

Legend

 
Google Pixel XL 2016 Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
HTC 10 Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
OnePlus 3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
 
Apple iPhone 7 Plus Apple A10 Fusion, Apple A10 Fusion GPU / PowerVR, 128 GB NVMe
 
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Samsung Exynos 8890 Octa, ARM Mali-T880 MP12, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
 
Lenovo Moto Z Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 MSM8994, Qualcomm Adreno 430, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Huawei P9 HiSilicon Kirin 955, ARM Mali-T880 MP4, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Lenovo ZUK Z2 Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
LG G5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 32 GB eMMC Flash
Octane V2 | Mozilla Kraken 1.1 | WebXPRT 2015 | JetStream 1.1
Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
Adreno 530, SD 821, 32 GB eMMC Flash
8690 Points
HTC 10
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
8905 Points +2%
OnePlus 3
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
9155 Points +5%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
26053 Points +200%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
13191 Points +52%
Lenovo Moto Z
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
7771 Points -11%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 32 GB eMMC Flash
8059 Points -7%
Huawei P9
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash
11783 Points +36%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB eMMC Flash
8436 Points -3%
LG G5
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
9731 Points +12%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
Adreno 530, SD 821, 32 GB eMMC Flash
2654 ms *
HTC 10
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
3146 ms * -19%
OnePlus 3
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
2921 ms * -10%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
1103 ms * +58%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
2564 ms * +3%
Lenovo Moto Z
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
3155 ms * -19%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 32 GB eMMC Flash
5553 ms * -109%
Huawei P9
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash
2923 ms * -10%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB eMMC Flash
3290 ms * -24%
LG G5
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
3461 ms * -30%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
Adreno 530, SD 821, 32 GB eMMC Flash
126 Points
HTC 10
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
108 Points -14%
OnePlus 3
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
122 Points -3%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
204 Points +62%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
163 Points +29%
Lenovo Moto Z
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
112 Points -11%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 32 GB eMMC Flash
113 Points -10%
Huawei P9
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash
128 Points +2%
LG G5
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
108 Points -14%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value)
Google Pixel XL 2016
Adreno 530, SD 821, 32 GB eMMC Flash
55.4 Points
HTC 10
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
52.1 Points -6%
OnePlus 3
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
54.4 Points -2%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
168.1 Points +203%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
75.1 Points +36%
Lenovo Moto Z
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
47.5 Points -14%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 32 GB eMMC Flash
46 Points -17%
Huawei P9
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash
68.4 Points +23%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB eMMC Flash
51.7 Points -7%
LG G5
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
49.7 Points -10%

* ... smaller is better

Google Pixel XL 2016
Adreno 530, SD 821, 32 GB eMMC Flash		HTC 10
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash		OnePlus 3
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash		Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash		Lenovo Moto Z
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash		Huawei P9
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash		Lenovo ZUK Z2
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 64 GB eMMC Flash		LG G5
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
AndroBench 3-5
-3%
56%
43%
155%
42%
-47%
37%
Sequential Read 256KB
258.2
275.1
7%
408.7
58%
487.3
89%
439.7
70%
281.3
9%
239.4
-7%
427.6
66%
Sequential Write 256KB
83.4
115.6
39%
153.3
84%
145.1
74%
168.3
102%
72.2
-13%
46.52
-44%
141.3
69%
Random Read 4KB
87.7
29.92
-66%
137.6
57%
86.7
-1%
117.2
34%
39
-56%
21.27
-76%
89.3
2%
Random Write 4KB
14.56
15.89
9%
18.23
25%
15.79
8%
74.9
414%
47.45
226%
5.64
-61%
16.22
11%
Asphalt 8: Airborne
 InställningarVärde
 high30 fps
 very low30 fps
Dead Trigger 2
 InställningarVärde
 high58 fps
Hög belastning
 42.3 °C41.1 °C34.3 °C 
 41.8 °C41.1 °C35.4 °C 
 39.5 °C38.6 °C34.7 °C 
Max: 42.3 °C
Medel: 38.8 °C
33.6 °C36.3 °C38.5 °C
34 °C34.8 °C37.3 °C
33.8 °C35.6 °C36.9 °C
Max: 38.5 °C
Medel: 35.6 °C
Strömförsörjning (max.)  33.6 °C | Rumstemperatur 21.3 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 38.8 °C / 102 F, compared to the average of 32.7 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42.3 °C / 108 F, compared to the average of 35 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 56 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 38.5 °C / 101 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.5 °C / 85 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2031.630.92525.4323125.328.54032.926.75033.6356331.626.68028.4281002733.812520.837.61602245.820021.350.225020.856.931521.262.940019.462.450019.566.363017.768.280017.966.2100017.869.7125017.370.5160017.474.8200016.775.9250017.275.7315018.278.3400017.981.7500017.680630017.776.6800017.877.51000017.974.41250018.163.31600018.248.8SPL3088.5N1.372.6median 17.9median 69.7Delta1.49.726.428.426.42826.72825.828.725.829.133.229.126.12626.123.925.523.927.724.727.733.426.933.441.53741.540.320.240.343.720.243.745.521.845.547224752.822.252.860.121.860.166.517.266.569.217.869.271.619.871.669.919.169.96815.46869.515.669.56614.96671.514.771.571.214.271.272.21472.271.213.971.26713.86758.913.958.952.413.952.454.713.754.781.529.581.549.91.349.9median 66median 17.2median 6610.13.810.131.636.225.430.625.328.532.928.133.638.231.633.328.428.4272620.825.82230.921.336.420.844.721.248.919.453.719.56117.763.717.969.817.872.817.37317.472.816.773.317.274.418.27317.973.117.670.817.770.517.870.917.971.918.166.618.261.43083.91.356.8median 17.9median 69.81.411.8hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseGoogle Pixel XL 2016Apple iPhone 7 PlusLenovo Moto Z
Google Pixel XL 2016 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 8.1% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 27% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 63% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 48% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 44% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Apple iPhone 7 Plus audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.7% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 39% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 54% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 58% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 35% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Lenovo Moto Z audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 34.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.4% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (1.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 47% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 45% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 66% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 27% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Strömförbrukning
Av/Standbydarklight 0.02 / 0.12 Watt
Låg belastningdarkmidlight 0.53 / 1.07 / 1.12 Watt
Hög belastning midlight 5.53 / 6.26 Watt
 color bar
Förklaring: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Currently we use the Metrahit Energy, a professional single phase power quality and energy measurement digital multimeter, for our measurements. Find out more about it here. All of our test methods can be found here.
Google Pixel XL 2016
3450 mAh		Google Nexus 6P
3450 mAh		HTC 10
3000 mAh		Apple iPhone 7 Plus
2915 mAh		Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
3600 mAh		Huawei P9 Plus
3400 mAh		OnePlus 3
3000 mAh
Power Consumption
-30%
-45%
-52%
-15%
-13%
-24%
Idle Minimum *
0.53
0.83
-57%
0.68
-28%
0.77
-45%
0.63
-19%
0.87
-64%
0.57
-8%
Idle Average *
1.07
1.09
-2%
1.49
-39%
2.04
-91%
1.1
-3%
1.2
-12%
1.24
-16%
Idle Maximum *
1.12
1.17
-4%
1.91
-71%
2.24
-100%
1.56
-39%
1.27
-13%
1.36
-21%
Load Average *
5.53
7.49
-35%
7.4
-34%
4.69
15%
5.95
-8%
4.69
15%
5.92
-7%
Load Maximum *
6.26
9.51
-52%
9.71
-55%
8.66
-38%
6.7
-7%
5.63
10%
10.53
-68%

* ... smaller is better

Batteritid
Låg belastning (utan WLAN, min. ljusstyrka)
22tim 13min
WiFi Websurfing (Chrome 53)
8tim 25min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
8tim 25min
Hög belastning (maximal ljusstyrka)
3tim 50min
Google Pixel XL 2016
3450 mAh		Google Nexus 6P
3450 mAh		HTC 10
3000 mAh		Apple iPhone 7 Plus
2915 mAh		Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
3600 mAh		Huawei P9 Plus
3400 mAh		OnePlus 3
3000 mAh
Battery Runtime
3%
-2%
28%
55%
20%
38%
Reader / Idle
1333
1447
9%
1273
-5%
1835
38%
1663
25%
1446
8%
1338
0%
H.264
505
533
6%
648
28%
813
61%
914
81%
776
54%
847
68%
WiFi v1.3
505
375
-26%
413
-18%
587
16%
732
45%
530
5%
840
66%
Load
230
280
22%
203
-12%
225
-2%
392
70%
263
14%
268
17%

För

+ bra skärm
+ välbyggd
+ LTE Cat. 11
+ snabbt WiFi
+ utmärkt röstkvalitet
+ utmärkta kameror

Emot

- ingen minneskortplats
- PWM
- prestandastrypning
In review: Google Pixel XL. Test model provided by Google Germany.
In review: Google Pixel XL. Test model provided by Google Germany.

Google Pixel XL är en mycket bra smartphone, men huvudfunktionen Google Assistant bör inte vara det främsta skälet att köpa den. Framförallt är det inget som rättfärdigar den höga prislappen. 

Med det sagt är Pixel XL utrustad med en snabb processor, gott om RAM-minne, en utmärkt kamera, snabbt WiFi och LTE Cat. 11. Dessutom är samtalskvaliteten utmärkt.

Designen kan man alltid ha åsikter om, men det är en besvikelse att man inte kan utöka lagringsutrymmet med microSD-kort, eftersom merkostnaden för en modell med högre kapacitet är ganska kännbar. Det obegränsade molnlagringsutrymmet för foton väger upp till viss del. Batteritiden kunde också varit bättre, men det kan möjligen åstadkommas med ny mjukvara, eftersom komponenterna borde ha bättre potential. 

Google Pixel XL har utmärkta funktioner. Tyvärr sätter även priset ett nytt rekord. Till syvende och sist är det en smartphone för entusiaster, som blir målgruppen som får avgöra om konceptet är framgångsrikt. 

Google Pixel XL 2016 - 11/02/2016 v5.1(old)
Daniel Schmidt

Design
80%
Tangentbord
70 / 75 → 94%
Mus
96%
Anslutningar
49 / 60 → 81%
Vikt
91%
Batteri
90%
Skärm
85%
Spelprestanda
62 / 63 → 98%
Programprestanda
57 / 70 → 81%
Temperatur
89%
Ljudnivå
100%
Audio
71 / 91 → 78%
Camera
86%
Medel
79%
88%
Smartphone - Vägt medel

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Bärbara datorer, laptops - tester och nyheter > Tester > Test: Google Pixel XL (sammanfattning)
Daniel Schmidt, 2016-11-14 (Update: 2016-11-14)