Notebookcheck

Test: Apple iPhone XR Smartphone (Sammanfattning)

Daniel Schmidt, 👁 Daniel Schmidt (översatt av Daniel Eriksson), 11/09/2018

Återigen bra – Apple positionerar iPhone XR mellan de två XS-modellerna storleksmässigt men utrustar den med en lägre upplöst skärm och bara en bakåtriktad kamera. Den har också några ytterligare mindre brister, men gör XR tillräckligt för att krönas till den totalt sett bästa iPhone-modellen? Läs vidare för att få reda på det.

Apple iPhone XR (iPhone Serie)
Processor
Apple A12 Bionic
Grafikkort
Apple A12 Bionic GPU
Minne
3072 MB 
, LPDDR4x
Skärm
6.1 tum 19.5:9, 1792 x 828 pixlar 324 PPI, Kapacitiv tryckkänslig, tio punkters multitouch, IPS, glansig: ja
Hårddisk
128 GB NVMe, 128 GB 
, 116.93 GB ledigt
Anslutningar
1 USB 2.0, Ljudanslutningar: Lightning, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensorer: 3 axlars Gyroskop, Accelerometer, Barometer, Digital Kompass, Face ID, Närhetssensor, Lightning-Port, eSIM, Galileo, QZSS
Nätverk
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM/GPRS/EDGE: 850, 900, 1,800, 1,900 MHz. UMTS/HSPA+: 850, 900, 1,700/2,100, 1,900, 2,100 MHz. LTE: FDD Band – 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 32, 66; TDD Band – 34, 38, 39, 40, 41., Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Storlek
höjd x bredd x djup (i mm) 8.3 x 150.9 x 75.7
Batteri
11.16 Wh, 2942 mAh Litiumjon, 3.79 V, Samtalstid 3G (enligt tillverkaren): 25 tim
Operativsystem
Apple iOS 12
Camera
Primary Camera: 12 MPix Vidvinkel: f/1.8, 1.4 μm, Fokus-Pixel, 6 linselement, OIS, True Tone-blixt, UHD Video i upp till 60 FPS
Secondary Camera: 7 MPix f/2.2, Full HD i upp till 60 FPS
Övrigt
Högtalare: Stereohögtalare, Tangentbord: Virtuellt tangentbord, Laddare, Lightning-kabel, Hörlurar, Snabbstartsguide, Apple-klistermärke, SIM-verktyg, 12 Månader Garanti, SAR-värde (Huvud): 0.99 W/kg, IP67-certifierad, Trådlös laddning (Qi), fanless
Vikt
194 g, Strömförsörjning: 46 g
Pris
909 Kr
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Storleksjämförelse

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
675 (min: 630, max: 704) MBit/s ∼100% +31%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Mali-G72 MP18, 9810, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
652 MBit/s ∼97% +26%
Apple iPhone XS
A12 Bionic GPU, A12 Bionic, Apple 512 GB (iPhone Xs)
650 MBit/s ∼96% +26%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
615 (min: 532, max: 642) MBit/s ∼91% +19%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
491 (min: 100, max: 534) MBit/s ∼73% -5%
Apple iPhone XR
A12 Bionic GPU, A12 Bionic, 128 GB NVMe
517 (min: 477, max: 528) MBit/s ∼77%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=311)
212 MBit/s ∼31% -59%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
696 (min: 647, max: 714) MBit/s ∼100% +8%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
663 (min: 289, max: 805) MBit/s ∼95% +3%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
647 (min: 598, max: 665) MBit/s ∼93% 0%
Apple iPhone XR
A12 Bionic GPU, A12 Bionic, 128 GB NVMe
644 (min: 578, max: 672) MBit/s ∼93%
Apple iPhone XS
A12 Bionic GPU, A12 Bionic, Apple 512 GB (iPhone Xs)
587 MBit/s ∼84% -9%
Samsung Galaxy S9
Mali-G72 MP18, 9810, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
519 MBit/s ∼75% -19%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=311)
206 MBit/s ∼30% -68%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø516 (477-528)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø644 (578-672)
GPS-test: Apple iPhone XR - Översikt
GPS-test: Apple iPhone XR - Översikt
GPS-test: Apple iPhone XR – Cykeltur runt en sjö
GPS-test: Apple iPhone XR – Cykeltur runt en sjö
GPS-test: Apple iPhone XR - Slinga
GPS-test: Apple iPhone XR - Slinga
GPS-test: Garmin Edge 500 - Översikt
GPS-test: Garmin Edge 500 - Översikt
GPS-test: Garmin Edge 500 - Cykeltur runt en sjö
GPS-test: Garmin Edge 500 - Cykeltur runt en sjö
GPS-test: Garmin Edge 500 - Slinga
GPS-test: Garmin Edge 500 - Slinga

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
Foto av vår testkarta
Foto av vår testkarta
Vår testkarta i detalj
629
cd/m²
661
cd/m²
632
cd/m²
616
cd/m²
672
cd/m²
644
cd/m²
622
cd/m²
662
cd/m²
632
cd/m²
Distribution av ljusstyrkan
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Max: 672 cd/m² Medel: 641.1 cd/m² Minimum: 2.08 cd/m²
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 92 %
Mitt på batteriet: 672 cd/m²
Kontrast: 1920:1 (Svärta: 0.35 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.3 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2
ΔE Greyscale 2.2 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
100% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.3
Apple iPhone XR
IPS, 1792x828, 6.1
Samsung Galaxy S9
Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 5.8
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
IPS, 2246x1080, 6.18
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
OLED, 3120x1440, 6.3
Apple iPhone XS
OLED, 2436x1125, 5.8
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5
Screen
-11%
-66%
-5%
6%
-6%
Brightness middle
672
529
-21%
489
-27%
576
-14%
639
-5%
559
-17%
Brightness
641
527
-18%
486
-24%
582
-9%
637
-1%
538
-16%
Brightness Distribution
92
96
4%
93
1%
90
-2%
94
2%
90
-2%
Black Level *
0.35
0.34
3%
0.38
-9%
Contrast
1920
1438
-25%
1471
-23%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
1.3
1.4
-8%
3.8
-192%
1.3
-0%
1
23%
1.3
-0%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
2.7
4
-48%
7.1
-163%
3.5
-30%
2.2
19%
2.7
-0%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2.2
1.6
27%
4.4
-100%
1.6
27%
2.2
-0%
1.8
18%
Gamma
2.3 96%
2.16 102%
2.22 99%
2.18 101%
1.9 116%
2.25 98%
CCT
6868 95%
6358 102%
7213 90%
6561 99%
6364 102%
6797 96%

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

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 not detected

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8929 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Display Response Times

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
20 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 6.8 ms rise
↘ 13.2 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 19 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
45.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 21.2 ms rise
↘ 24.4 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 71 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (41 ms).
Geekbench 4.1/4.2
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
21070 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S9
6219 Points ∼30% -70%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
14369 Points ∼68% -32%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
8938 Points ∼42% -58%
Average Apple A12 Bionic
21070 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (836 - 21070, n=198)
4508 Points ∼21% -79%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
11276 Points ∼97%
Apple iPhone XS
11598 Points ∼100% +3%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
10558 Points ∼91% -6%
Samsung Galaxy S9
8786 Points ∼76% -22%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
9182 Points ∼79% -19%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
10024 Points ∼86% -11%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (11244 - 11598, n=3)
11373 Points ∼98% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (883 - 11598, n=248)
4298 Points ∼37% -62%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
4750 Points ∼98%
Apple iPhone XS
4824 Points ∼100% +2%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
4263 Points ∼88% -10%
Samsung Galaxy S9
3688 Points ∼76% -22%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
2468 Points ∼51% -48%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
3378 Points ∼70% -29%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (4750 - 4824, n=3)
4783 Points ∼99% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (394 - 4824, n=249)
1267 Points ∼26% -73%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9
5291 Points ∼57%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
8101 Points ∼88%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
9225 Points ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone (3146 - 9868, n=256)
4551 Points ∼49%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9
5736 Points ∼46%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
9664 Points ∼77%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
12535 Points ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone (4058 - 13531, n=424)
4956 Points ∼40%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
3030 Points ∼69%
Apple iPhone XS
2998 Points ∼69% -1%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
2187 Points ∼50% -28%
Samsung Galaxy S9
2590 Points ∼59% -15%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
2257 Points ∼52% -26%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4364 Points ∼100% +44%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (2723 - 3030, n=3)
2917 Points ∼67% -4%
Average of class Smartphone (2293 - 4439, n=277)
1709 Points ∼39% -44%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
5061 Points ∼98%
Apple iPhone XS
5139 Points ∼100% +2%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
3325 Points ∼65% -34%
Samsung Galaxy S9
3697 Points ∼72% -27%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
4468 Points ∼87% -12%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4250 Points ∼83% -16%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (4828 - 5139, n=3)
5009 Points ∼97% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (869 - 8206, n=277)
1465 Points ∼29% -71%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
4405 Points ∼99%
Apple iPhone XS
4436 Points ∼100% +1%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
2981 Points ∼67% -32%
Samsung Galaxy S9
3376 Points ∼76% -23%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
3669 Points ∼83% -17%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4275 Points ∼96% -3%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (4121 - 4436, n=3)
4321 Points ∼97% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (1010 - 5189, n=280)
1360 Points ∼31% -69%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
2880 Points ∼65%
Apple iPhone XS
2952 Points ∼67% +3%
Samsung Galaxy S9
2650 Points ∼60% -8%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
2832 Points ∼64% -2%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4407 Points ∼100% +53%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (2880 - 2961, n=3)
2931 Points ∼67% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (375 - 4493, n=293)
1686 Points ∼38% -41%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
14085 Points ∼94%
Apple iPhone XS
14951 Points ∼100% +6%
Samsung Galaxy S9
4843 Points ∼32% -66%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
6898 Points ∼46% -51%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
5854 Points ∼39% -58%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (10374 - 14951, n=3)
13137 Points ∼88% -7%
Average of class Smartphone (131 - 14951, n=293)
2062 Points ∼14% -85%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
7555 Points ∼96%
Apple iPhone XS
7856 Points ∼100% +4%
Samsung Galaxy S9
4091 Points ∼52% -46%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
5230 Points ∼67% -31%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
5456 Points ∼69% -28%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (6667 - 7856, n=3)
7359 Points ∼94% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (159 - 7856, n=294)
1729 Points ∼22% -77%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
3121 Points ∼75%
Apple iPhone XS
2960 Points ∼71% -5%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
2109 Points ∼50% -32%
Samsung Galaxy S9
2486 Points ∼59% -20%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
2528 Points ∼60% -19%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4183 Points ∼100% +34%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (2960 - 3121, n=3)
3036 Points ∼73% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (2281 - 4216, n=352)
1642 Points ∼39% -47%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
3806 Points ∼80%
Apple iPhone XS
3712 Points ∼78% -2%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
3069 Points ∼65% -19%
Samsung Galaxy S9
3553 Points ∼75% -7%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
4746 Points ∼100% +25%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4206 Points ∼89% +11%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (3712 - 3806, n=3)
3748 Points ∼79% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (815 - 5241, n=352)
1186 Points ∼25% -69%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
3629 Points ∼86%
Apple iPhone XS
3514 Points ∼84% -3%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
2781 Points ∼66% -23%
Samsung Galaxy S9
3244 Points ∼77% -11%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
3972 Points ∼95% +9%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4201 Points ∼100% +16%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (3514 - 3629, n=3)
3562 Points ∼85% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (951 - 4734, n=360)
1134 Points ∼27% -69%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
2960 Points ∼71%
Apple iPhone XS
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S9
2600 Points ∼63% -12%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
2720 Points ∼66% -8%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4150 Points ∼100% +40%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (2713 - 2960, n=3)
1891 Points ∼46% -36%
Average of class Smartphone (532 - 4215, n=385)
1538 Points ∼37% -48%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
7806 Points ∼94%
Apple iPhone XS
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S9
4569 Points ∼55% -41%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
8261 Points ∼100% +6%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
5305 Points ∼64% -32%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (7055 - 7806, n=3)
4954 Points ∼60% -37%
Average of class Smartphone (46 - 8312, n=385)
1627 Points ∼20% -79%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
5724 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS
Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S9
3911 Points ∼68% -32%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
5687 Points ∼99% -1%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4996 Points ∼87% -13%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (5205 - 5724, n=3)
3643 Points ∼64% -36%
Average of class Smartphone (58 - 6454, n=393)
1384 Points ∼24% -76%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
27413 Points ∼75%
Apple iPhone XS
27400 Points ∼75% 0%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
25641 Points ∼70% -6%
Samsung Galaxy S9
26851 Points ∼73% -2%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
34928 Points ∼95% +27%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
36755 Points ∼100% +34%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (27400 - 27717, n=3)
27510 Points ∼75% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (3958 - 37475, n=540)
12875 Points ∼35% -53%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
162695 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS
160199 Points ∼98% -2%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
113380 Points ∼70% -30%
Samsung Galaxy S9
48433 Points ∼30% -70%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
82125 Points ∼50% -50%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
67730 Points ∼42% -58%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (159735 - 162695, n=3)
160876 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (2465 - 162695, n=540)
17971 Points ∼11% -89%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
77597 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS
77128 Points ∼99% -1%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
64405 Points ∼83% -17%
Samsung Galaxy S9
41093 Points ∼53% -47%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
63159 Points ∼81% -19%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
57047 Points ∼74% -26%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (77128 - 77599, n=3)
77441 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (2915 - 77599, n=541)
15098 Points ∼19% -81%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
232 fps ∼92%
Apple iPhone XS
251 fps ∼100% +8%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
166.9 fps ∼66% -28%
Samsung Galaxy S9
144 fps ∼57% -38%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
150 fps ∼60% -35%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
120 fps ∼48% -48%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (226 - 251, n=3)
236 fps ∼94% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 251, n=565)
31.3 fps ∼12% -87%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
60 fps ∼50%
Apple iPhone XS
60 fps ∼50% 0%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
119.4 fps ∼100% +99%
Samsung Galaxy S9
60 fps ∼50% 0%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
60 fps ∼50% 0%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
61 fps ∼51% +2%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (60 - 60, n=3)
60 fps ∼50% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (6.9 - 120, n=568)
24.9 fps ∼21% -58%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
132 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS
115 fps ∼87% -13%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
71 fps ∼54% -46%
Samsung Galaxy S9
73 fps ∼55% -45%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
71 fps ∼54% -46%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
73 fps ∼55% -45%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (107 - 132, n=3)
118 fps ∼89% -11%
Average of class Smartphone (2.2 - 132, n=487)
16.8 fps ∼13% -87%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
60 fps ∼76%
Apple iPhone XS
60 fps ∼76% 0%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
79.2 fps ∼100% +32%
Samsung Galaxy S9
45 fps ∼57% -25%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
58 fps ∼73% -3%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
42 fps ∼53% -30%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (59 - 60, n=3)
59.7 fps ∼75% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 115, n=490)
16 fps ∼20% -73%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
88 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS
62 fps ∼70% -30%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
49 fps ∼56% -44%
Samsung Galaxy S9
46 fps ∼52% -48%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
35 fps ∼40% -60%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
29 fps ∼33% -67%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (62 - 88, n=3)
73.1 fps ∼83% -17%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 88, n=349)
14.3 fps ∼16% -84%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
60 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS
48 fps ∼80% -20%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
56.4 fps ∼94% -6%
Samsung Galaxy S9
24 fps ∼40% -60%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
54 fps ∼90% -10%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
26 fps ∼43% -57%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (48 - 60, n=3)
55.6 fps ∼93% -7%
Average of class Smartphone (9.8 - 110, n=352)
13.9 fps ∼23% -77%
GFXBench
High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
59 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS
35 fps ∼59% -41%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
22 fps ∼37% -63%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
19 fps ∼32% -68%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (32.1 - 59, n=3)
42 fps ∼71% -29%
Average of class Smartphone (3.6 - 59, n=62)
10.2 fps ∼17% -83%
2560x1440 High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
20 fps ∼91%
Apple iPhone XS
22 fps ∼100% +10%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
14 fps ∼64% -30%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
13 fps ∼59% -35%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (16.3 - 22, n=3)
19.4 fps ∼88% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (2.2 - 31, n=62)
6.49 fps ∼30% -68%
Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
59 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS
41 fps ∼69% -31%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
31 fps ∼53% -47%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
18 fps ∼31% -69%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (41 - 59, n=3)
49 fps ∼83% -17%
Average of class Smartphone (5.7 - 59, n=62)
14.4 fps ∼24% -76%
1920x1080 Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
63 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS
48 fps ∼76% -24%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
32 fps ∼51% -49%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
33 fps ∼52% -48%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (36.8 - 63, n=3)
49.3 fps ∼78% -22%
Average of class Smartphone (6 - 63, n=61)
15.7 fps ∼25% -75%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
54 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS
38 fps ∼70% -30%
Samsung Galaxy S9
28 fps ∼52% -48%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
35 fps ∼65% -35%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
31 fps ∼57% -43%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (38 - 54, n=3)
44 fps ∼81% -19%
Average of class Smartphone (6.3 - 54, n=280)
9.86 fps ∼18% -82%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
58 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS
31 fps ∼53% -47%
Samsung Galaxy S9
14 fps ∼24% -76%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
33 fps ∼57% -43%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
16 fps ∼28% -72%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (31 - 58, n=3)
40 fps ∼69% -31%
Average of class Smartphone (6 - 58, n=283)
8.89 fps ∼15% -85%
Basemark GPU
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
24.51 (min: 11.54, max: 48.55) fps ∼76%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
29.12 (min: 9.74, max: 74.17) fps ∼90%
Average of class Smartphone (0 - 651, n=36)
32.4 fps ∼100%
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
15.8 (min: 10.44, max: 44.6) fps ∼55%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
16.92 (min: 6.06, max: 28.78) fps ∼59%
Average of class Smartphone (0 - 606, n=34)
28.8 fps ∼100%
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
21.26 (min: 11.26, max: 61.24) fps ∼59%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
25.57 (min: 7.38, max: 46.96) fps ∼71%
Average of class Smartphone (0 - 739, n=32)
36.1 fps ∼100%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XS
348178 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S9
243861 Points ∼70%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
263165 Points ∼76%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
300617 Points ∼86%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (302955 - 348178, n=2)
325567 Points ∼94%
Average of class Smartphone (17073 - 348178, n=171)
117893 Points ∼34%
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
218158 Points ∼87%
Samsung Galaxy S9
217950 Points ∼87%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
227026 Points ∼91%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
250848 Points ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone (23275 - 254229, n=394)
76519 Points ∼31%
VRMark - Amber Room (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
4731 Score ∼94%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
5025 Score ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone (0 - 5025, n=39)
1773 Score ∼35%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
1722 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS
1711 Points ∼99% -1%
Samsung Galaxy S9
1099 Points ∼64% -36%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
1296 Points ∼75% -25%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
1424 Points ∼83% -17%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (1711 - 1731, n=3)
1721 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (7 - 1731, n=500)
697 Points ∼40% -60%
Graphics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
15969 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS
15875 Points ∼99% -1%
Samsung Galaxy S9
6373 Points ∼40% -60%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
7945 Points ∼50% -50%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
6273 Points ∼39% -61%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (15659 - 15969, n=3)
15834 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (18 - 15969, n=500)
1735 Points ∼11% -89%
Memory (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
3263 Points ∼52%
Apple iPhone XS
4169 Points ∼66% +28%
Samsung Galaxy S9
2669 Points ∼42% -18%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
3239 Points ∼52% -1%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
6283 Points ∼100% +93%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (1815 - 4169, n=3)
3082 Points ∼49% -6%
Average of class Smartphone (21 - 6283, n=500)
1243 Points ∼20% -62%
System (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
11946 Points ∼98%
Apple iPhone XS
12202 Points ∼100% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S9
6234 Points ∼51% -48%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
6506 Points ∼53% -46%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
8604 Points ∼71% -28%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (11675 - 12202, n=3)
11941 Points ∼98% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (369 - 12202, n=500)
2509 Points ∼21% -79%
Overall (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
5721 Points ∼94%
Apple iPhone XS
6097 Points ∼100% +7%
Samsung Galaxy S9
3285 Points ∼54% -43%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
3838 Points ∼63% -33%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4687 Points ∼77% -18%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (4895 - 6097, n=3)
5571 Points ∼91% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (150 - 6097, n=504)
1253 Points ∼21% -78%
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR
2754 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS
2606 Points ∼95% -5%
Samsung Galaxy S9
1436 Points ∼52% -48%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
1571 Points ∼57% -43%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (2407 - 2754, n=3)
2589 Points ∼94% -6%
Average of class Smartphone (36.3 - 2754, n=76)
693 Points ∼25% -75%

Legend

 
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, Apple A12 Bionic GPU, 128 GB NVMe
 
Apple iPhone XS Apple A12 Bionic, Apple A12 Bionic GPU, Apple 512 GB (iPhone Xs)
 
Apple iPhone 8 Plus Apple A11 Bionic, Apple A11 Bionic GPU, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
 
Samsung Galaxy S9 Samsung Exynos 9810, ARM Mali-G72 MP18, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Xiaomi Pocophone F1 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, ARM Mali-G76 MP10, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Apple iPhone XS (Safari Mobile 12.0)
272.3 Points ∼100% +2%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (268 - 273, n=3)
271 Points ∼100% +1%
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0)
267.84 Points ∼98%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
223.5 Points ∼82% -17%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
109.18 Points ∼40% -59%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1 (Chrome 68)
75.959 Points ∼28% -72%
Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0)
67.721 Points ∼25% -75%
Average of class Smartphone (10.8 - 273, n=423)
36.7 Points ∼13% -86%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone XS (Safari Mobile 12.0)
43280 Points ∼100% +1%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (42897 - 43280, n=3)
43097 Points ∼100% 0%
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0)
42897 Points ∼99%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
35209 Points ∼81% -18%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
23285 Points ∼54% -46%
Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0)
15233 Points ∼35% -64%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1 (Chrome 68)
14514 Points ∼34% -66%
Average of class Smartphone (1506 - 43280, n=559)
5558 Points ∼13% -87%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=579)
11477 ms * ∼100% -1781%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1 (Chrome 68)
2713.6 ms * ∼24% -345%
Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0)
2077.8 ms * ∼18% -240%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
1951.9 ms * ∼17% -220%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
719.7 ms * ∼6% -18%
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0)
610.3 ms * ∼5%
Apple iPhone XS (Safari Mobile 12.0)
609.1 ms * ∼5% -0%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (603 - 610, n=3)
608 ms * ∼5% -0%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0)
161 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS (Safari Mobile 12.0)
159 Points ∼99% -1%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (155 - 161, n=3)
158 Points ∼98% -2%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
124 Points ∼77% -23%
Average of class Smartphone (25 - 161, n=63)
63.6 Points ∼40% -60%
Samsung Galaxy S9
63 Points ∼39% -61%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
362 Points ∼100% +6%
Apple iPhone XS (Safari Mobile 12.0)
345 Points ∼95% +1%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (343 - 347, n=3)
345 Points ∼95% +1%
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0)
343 Points ∼95%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
334 Points ∼92% -3%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1 (Chrome 68)
223 Points ∼62% -35%
Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0)
163 Points ∼45% -52%
Average of class Smartphone (91 - 362, n=284)
111 Points ∼31% -68%

* ... smaller is better

PUBG Mobile (HD)
0102030405060Tooltip
; 0.9.0: Ø40.5 (32-59)
World of Tanks Blitz (High)
0102030405060Tooltip
; 5.4.0: Ø59.4 (58-60)
Hög belastning
 37.5 °C38.2 °C35.9 °C 
 35.5 °C35.2 °C35.8 °C 
 34.2 °C34.3 °C33.8 °C 
Max: 38.2 °C
Medel: 35.6 °C
34.9 °C38.4 °C40.3 °C
34.1 °C36.9 °C38.6 °C
33.2 °C35.4 °C35.5 °C
Max: 40.3 °C
Medel: 36.4 °C
Strömförsörjning (max.)  36.8 °C | Rumstemperatur 21.1 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 35.6 °C / 96 F, compared to the average of 33.2 °C / 92 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 38.2 °C / 101 F, compared to the average of 35.7 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 40.3 °C / 105 F, compared to the average of 34.2 °C / 94 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 30.9 °C / 88 F, compared to the device average of 33.2 °C / 92 F.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2027.429.82521.623.5312523.94031.230.35047.446.56331.329.28023.432.410030.736.512520.941.916019.254.92001652.725016.45731516.458.540015.658.850014.860.463014.862.680015.862.1100014.365.9125014.271.9160014.475.6200014.576.6250014.677.7315014.679.2400014.578.9500014.776.4630014.575.3800014.669.21000014.758.21250014.953.51600015.449.4SPL27.487.3N0.964.8median 14.8median 62.1Delta1.49.5hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseApple iPhone XR
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Apple iPhone XR audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 11.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.9% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 12.5% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 15% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 73% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 47% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 44% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Strömförbrukning
Av/Standbydarklight 0 / 0.09 Watt
Låg belastningdarkmidlight 0.61 / 2.67 / 2.69 Watt
Hög belastning midlight 4.34 / 5.66 Watt
 color bar
Förklaring: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Apple iPhone XR
2942 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S9
3000 mAh
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
4000 mAh
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4200 mAh
Apple iPhone XS
2658 mAh
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
2691 mAh
Average Apple A12 Bionic
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
26%
-3%
-7%
11%
-10%
3%
5%
Idle Minimum *
0.61
0.65
-7%
0.65
-7%
0.95
-56%
0.95
-56%
0.72
-18%
0.853 (0.61 - 1, n=3)
-40%
0.879 (0.2 - 3.4, n=642)
-44%
Idle Average *
2.67
0.81
70%
1.97
26%
2.17
19%
1.34
50%
2.45
8%
1.803 (1.34 - 2.67, n=3)
32%
1.721 (0.6 - 6.2, n=641)
36%
Idle Maximum *
2.69
0.92
66%
2.01
25%
2.25
16%
1.48
45%
2.52
6%
1.957 (1.48 - 2.69, n=3)
27%
1.998 (0.74 - 6.6, n=642)
26%
Load Average *
4.34
4.76
-10%
4.29
1%
4.47
-3%
4
8%
3.84
12%
4.31 (4 - 4.6, n=3)
1%
4.04 (0.8 - 10.8, n=636)
7%
Load Maximum *
5.66
5.16
9%
9.05
-60%
6.15
-9%
5.13
9%
9.02
-59%
5.83 (5.13 - 6.7, n=3)
-3%
5.76 (1.2 - 14.2, n=636)
-2%

* ... smaller is better

Batteritid
Låg belastning (utan WLAN, min. ljusstyrka)
49tim 29min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3 (Safari Mobile 12)
15tim 10min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
16tim 51min
Hög belastning (maximal ljusstyrka)
4tim 30min
Apple iPhone XR
2942 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S9
3000 mAh
Xiaomi Pocophone F1
4000 mAh
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4200 mAh
Apple iPhone XS
2658 mAh
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
2691 mAh
Battery Runtime
-47%
-17%
-17%
-31%
-27%
Reader / Idle
2969
1182
-60%
2088
-30%
1747
-41%
1442
-51%
2085
-30%
H.264
1011
609
-40%
936
-7%
854
-16%
745
-26%
733
-27%
WiFi v1.3
910
474
-48%
808
-11%
767
-16%
570
-37%
657
-28%
Load
270
164
-39%
220
-19%
282
4%
245
-9%
211
-22%

För

+ ljusstark skärm med god färgprecision
+ kraftfull SoC
+ IP67-certifierad
+ dual-SIM (eSIM)
+ skaplig bakåtriktad kamera
+ trådlös laddning
+ bra mobilfrekvenstäckning
+ utmärkt batteritid

Emot

- positioneringen kunde varit mer exakt
- endast 12 månaders garanti
- minnet går inte att utöka
- begränsad NFC-funktionalitet
- snabbladdare ingår ej
- ingen hörlursanslutning
Recension av Apple iPhone XR.
Recension av Apple iPhone XR.

Läs den fullständiga versionen av den här recensionen på engelska här.

Apples iPhone XR delar många komponenter med modellerna i den dyrare iPhone XS-serien, de har bland annat samma SoC, huvudkamera, Face ID-system, stöd för dubbla SIM-kort och trådlösa laddning. Apple har kompromissat på en del områden vilket inkluderar lägre IP-certifiering, ett sämre modem och en LCD-skärm med lägre upplösning. Huvudkameran saknar också XS-seriens optiska zoom och några dess porträttfunktioner.

iPhone XR är en billigare och färgrikare version av XS-serien. XR delar mycket av sin hårdvara med de dyrare syskonen utan att för prisets skull behöva kompromissa på nyckelområden.

Den lägre upplösta LCD-skärmen är i vårt tycke ett villospår. Den använder inte PWM för att justera skärmens ljusstyrka, vilket XS-serien gör; något som kan anstränga ögonen eller ge en del personer huvudvärk. Dessutom förbättrar den lägre upplösningen batteritiden rejält utan att bildkvaliteten behöver offras.

Prisskillnaden mellan XR och iPhone XS är gigantisk. Vi ser heller inga påtagliga nackdelar som hindrar oss från att rekommendera den framför de dyrare syskonen. En större storlek kan göra den mindre tilltalande än XS för somliga, men det är en fråga om smak. Totalt sett är iPhone XR mer prisvärd än både iPhone XS och XS Max.

Apple iPhone XR - 11/05/2018 v6
Daniel Schmidt

Design
92%
Tangentbord
67 / 75 → 89%
Mus
96%
Anslutningar
46 / 60 → 77%
Vikt
89%
Batteri
98%
Skärm
92%
Spelprestanda
73 / 63 → 100%
Programprestanda
87 / 70 → 100%
Temperatur
90%
Ljudnivå
100%
Audio
72 / 91 → 79%
Camera
86%
Medel
84%
90%
Smartphone - Vägt medel

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Bärbara datorer, laptops - tester och nyheter > Tester > Test: Apple iPhone XR Smartphone (Sammanfattning)
Daniel Schmidt, 2018-11- 9 (Update: 2018-11- 9)