Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Türkçe
Chinese
MagyarTest: CAT S31 Smartphone (Sammanfattning)
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Nomu S30 | |
| Blackview BV8000 Pro | |
| CAT S31 | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| AGM A8 | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Nomu S30 | |
| Blackview BV8000 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| CAT S31 | |
| AGM A8 | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 92 %
Mitt på batteriet: 784 cd/m²
Kontrast: 1742:1 (Svärta: 0.45 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.28 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 6.1 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
98.1% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.49
| CAT S31 IPS, 1280x720, 4.70 | AGM A8 IPS, 1280x720, 5.00 | Nomu S30 IPS, 1920x1080, 5.50 | Blackview BV8000 Pro IPS, 1920x1080, 5.00 | Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 IPS, 1280x720, 5.00 | CAT S40 IPS, 960x540, 4.70 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 4% | -33% | -64% | -36% | -8% | |
| Brightness middle | 784 | 356 -55% | 423 -46% | 434 -45% | 445 -43% | 607 -23% |
| Brightness | 750 | 343 -54% | 421 -44% | 414 -45% | 437 -42% | 579 -23% |
| Brightness Distribution | 92 | 93 1% | 93 1% | 86 -7% | 88 -4% | 90 -2% |
| Black Level * | 0.45 | 0.21 53% | 0.26 42% | 0.64 -42% | 0.67 -49% | 0.5 -11% |
| Contrast | 1742 | 1695 -3% | 1627 -7% | 678 -61% | 664 -62% | 1214 -30% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.28 | 3.7 14% | 7.8 -82% | 9.8 -129% | 6.5 -52% | 4.25 1% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 8.75 | 8.3 5% | 14.5 -66% | 19.2 -119% | 10.6 -21% | |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 6.1 | 1.9 69% | 9.8 -61% | 9.9 -62% | 7.2 -18% | 4.09 33% |
| Gamma | 2.49 88% | 2.5 88% | 2.32 95% | 2.64 83% | 2.53 87% | 2.61 84% |
| CCT | 7175 91% | 6412 101% | 9828 66% | 9219 71% | 8274 79% | 6959 93% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 71.2034 | |||||
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 94.1292 |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| 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 17924 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 24.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 13.6 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 10.8 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 52 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21.5 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 42 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 21 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 21 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 63 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (33.7 ms). | ||
| AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| CAT S31 | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Nomu S30 | |
| Blackview BV8000 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| PCMark for Android | |
| Work performance score (sort by value) | |
| CAT S31 | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Nomu S30 | |
| Blackview BV8000 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| CAT S40 | |
| Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value) | |
| CAT S31 | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Nomu S30 | |
| Blackview BV8000 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| BaseMark OS II | |
| Overall (sort by value) | |
| CAT S31 | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Nomu S30 | |
| Blackview BV8000 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| CAT S40 | |
| System (sort by value) | |
| CAT S31 | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Nomu S30 | |
| Blackview BV8000 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| CAT S40 | |
| Memory (sort by value) | |
| CAT S31 | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Nomu S30 | |
| Blackview BV8000 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| CAT S40 | |
| Graphics (sort by value) | |
| CAT S31 | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Nomu S30 | |
| Blackview BV8000 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| CAT S40 | |
| Web (sort by value) | |
| CAT S31 | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Nomu S30 | |
| Blackview BV8000 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| CAT S40 | |
| Geekbench 4.4 | |
| 64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value) | |
| CAT S31 | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Blackview BV8000 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| 64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value) | |
| CAT S31 | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Blackview BV8000 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value) | |
| Blackview BV8000 Pro | |
| GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | |
| T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| CAT S31 | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Nomu S30 | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| CAT S40 | |
| 1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| CAT S31 | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Nomu S30 | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| CAT S40 | |
| GFXBench 3.0 | |
| on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value) | |
| CAT S31 | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Nomu S30 | |
| Blackview BV8000 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| CAT S40 | |
| 1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| CAT S31 | |
| AGM A8 | |
| Nomu S30 | |
| Blackview BV8000 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
| CAT S40 | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
| Blackview BV8000 Pro (Crome Version 51) | |
| Nomu S30 (Chrome 57) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 (Chrome 58) | |
| AGM A8 (Chrome 58.0.3029.83) | |
| CAT S31 | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Blackview BV8000 Pro (Crome Version 51) | |
| Nomu S30 (Chrome 57) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 (Chrome 58) | |
| AGM A8 | |
| CAT S31 | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Nomu S30 (Chrome 57) | |
| Blackview BV8000 Pro (Crome Version 51) | |
| CAT S31 | |
| AGM A8 (Chrome 58.0.3029.83) | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 (Chrome 58) | |
| WebXPRT 2015 - Overall | |
| Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 (Chrome 58) | |
* ... smaller is better
| CAT S31 | AGM A8 | Nomu S30 | Blackview BV8000 Pro | Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -21% | 65% | 119% | 31% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 71.1 | 140.7 98% | 242 240% | 246.4 247% | 181.6 155% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 62.1 | 69.5 12% | 194.9 214% | 177.1 185% | 73.6 19% |
| Random Read 4KB | 14.28 | 11.44 -20% | 27.99 96% | 52.7 269% | 21.8 53% |
| Random Write 4KB | 14.81 | 3.73 -75% | 8.84 -40% | 15.05 2% | 11.9 -20% |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 81.8 | 22.01 ? -73% | 36.94 ? -55% | 79.3 ? -3% | 69 ? -16% |
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 59.5 | 20.46 ? -66% | 21.52 ? -64% | 68.7 ? 15% | 55.7 ? -6% |
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 36.4 °C / 98 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 33.9 °C / 93 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.8 °C / 84 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.
CAT S31 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (76.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (26.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 63% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 31% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 79% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 17% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Apple iPhone X audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 18% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 73% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 39% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 53% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Av/Standby |   0.21 / 0.33 Watt |
| Låg belastning |  0.73 / 2.21 / 2.25 Watt |
| Hög belastning |
2.99 / 4.12 Watt |
    
| |
| CAT S31 4000 mAh | AGM A8 4050 mAh | Nomu S30 5000 mAh | Blackview BV8000 Pro 4180 mAh | Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 2800 mAh | CAT S40 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -23% | -27% | -16% | -4% | -24% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.73 | 0.86 -18% | 0.93 -27% | 0.85 -16% | 0.56 23% | 1.2 -64% |
| Idle Average * | 2.21 | 1.97 11% | 2.31 -5% | 1.56 29% | 1.57 29% | 2 10% |
| Idle Maximum * | 2.25 | 2.04 9% | 2.35 -4% | 1.67 26% | 1.68 25% | 2.1 7% |
| Load Average * | 2.99 | 4.86 -63% | 4.57 -53% | 4.37 -46% | 4.6 -54% | 4.3 -44% |
| Load Maximum * | 4.12 | 6.43 -56% | 6.1 -48% | 7.06 -71% | 5.92 -44% | 5.3 -29% |
* ... smaller is better
| CAT S31 4000 mAh | AGM A8 4050 mAh | Nomu S30 5000 mAh | Blackview BV8000 Pro 4180 mAh | Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 2800 mAh | CAT S40 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | ||||||
| WiFi v1.3 | 1074 | 654 -39% | 832 -23% | 688 -36% | 668 -38% | 611 -43% |
För
Emot
I våra tester så visar sig Cat S31 vara den enhet som tillverkaren utlovar: En robust smartphone som kan klara av nästan alla typer av omgivning. Det faktum att det tekniska innanmätet inte är ifatt den senaste utvecklingen kan accepteras, men eventuella köpare kan tänkas vilja välja den betydligt billigare konkurrenten AGM. Som en ren smartphone så är S31 en instegsenhet med ett stabilt system och stabil prestanda. Enkla appar och webbläsaraktiviteter är inga problem för enheten. Om du vill kan du till och med använda den med handskar på.
CAT S31 är en pålitlig smartphone vars huvudsakliga uppgift är att inte gå sönder. Den uppnår i varje fall detta, men användaren får klara sig utan krävande applikationer.
Valet att köpa en såpass robust enhet beror ofta på magkänsla. Certifieringar och grov design med mycket vinklar erbjuds av alla som tillverkar sådana enheter. Huruvida CAT S31 verkligen kan klara av dom mest extrema förhållandena kan bara ses i ett uthållighetstest för respektive område från användaren. S31 ger oss ett väldigt gediget intryck, men det höga priset kan inte berättigas av endast prestandan och höljet.
CAT S31
-
12/29/2017 v6(old)
Mike Wobker