Notebookcheck

Test: Huawei Mate 9 (sammanfattning)

Daniel Schmidt, 12/04/2016

Tänk stort! Om du uppskattar stora smartphones i flaggskeppsklassen bör du ta en titt på Huaweis senaste modell. Utöver den nya kretsen Kirin 960 ingår en dubbelkamera, Android 7.0 (med EMUI 5.0) och ett stort batteri. Höjdpunkten är dock IPS-skärmen på 5,9 tum. Mobilen är bra, men inte utan svagheter.

Huawei Mate 9 (Mate Serie)
Processor
HiSilicon Kirin 960 2.4 GHz
Grafikkort
ARM Mali-G71 MP8, Kärna: 900 MHz
Minne
4096 MB 
, LPDDR4-1800
Skärm
5.9 tum 16:9, 1920x1080 pixlar 373 PPI, kapacitiv pekskärm, 10 multitouch-punkter, IPS, Nattläge, glansig: ja
Hårddisk
64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 64 GB 
, 49.55 GB ledigt
Anslutningar
1 USB 2.0, Ljudanslutningar: headset, Kortläsare: MicroSD upp till 256 GB (SD, SDHC, SDXC), 1 Fingeravtrycksläsare, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensorer: Position, accelerometer, orientering och G-sensor, digital kompass, barometer, OTG, DLNA, Miracast, IR
Nätverk
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.2, GSP/GPRS/Edge (850, 900, 1800 och 1900 MHz), UMTS/HSPA+ (Band 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8 och 19), LTE Cat. 11 (Band 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 29 (alla FDD), 38, 39, 40, 41 (TDD)), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Storlek
höjd x bredd x djup (i mm) 7.9 x 156.9 x 78.9
Batteri
4000 mAh Litiumpolymer, Samtalstid 3G (enligt tillverkaren): 30 tim, Standby 3G (enligt tillverkaren): 504 tim
Operativsystem
Android 7.0 Nougat
Camera
Primary Camera: 20 MPix Monokrom sensor + 12 MP RGB-sensor Leica dubbelkamera, Hybrid-AF, OIS, Hybrid-Zoom, 2-tons blixt, Ultra HD-video
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix (AF, 1080p-Video)
Övrigt
Högtalare: två högtalare, Tangentbord: virtuellt, OTG-adapter, skyddsfodral, EMUI 5.0, Phone Manager, HiCare, Facebook, Smart Controller, Twitter, Todolist, WPS Office, 24 Månader Garanti, USB Type-C, quick-charge, 4 mikrofoner med brusreducering, SAR huvud: 1.64 W/kg, SAR kropp: 1.36 W/kg, fanless
Vikt
192 g, Strömförsörjning: 101 g
Pris
699 Kr

 

Size Comparison

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
532 MBit/s ∼100% +105%
Google Pixel XL 2016
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Linksys EA8500, 5.0 GHz)
515 MBit/s ∼97% +99%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
Mali-T880 MP12, 8890 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash (Linksys EA8500, 5.0 GHz)
281 MBit/s ∼53% +8%
Huawei Mate 9
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash (Linksys EA8500, 5.0 GHz)
259 MBit/s ∼49%
LG G5
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Linksys EA8500, 5.0 GHz)
257 MBit/s ∼48% -1%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
485 MBit/s ∼100% +194%
Google Pixel XL 2016
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Linksys EA8500, 5.0 GHz)
435 MBit/s ∼90% +164%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
Mali-T880 MP12, 8890 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash (Linksys EA8500, 5.0 GHz)
335 MBit/s ∼69% +103%
LG G5
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Linksys EA8500, 5.0 GHz)
256 MBit/s ∼53% +55%
Huawei Mate 9
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash (Linksys EA8500, 5.0 GHz)
165 MBit/s ∼34%
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Huawei Mate 9
Huawei Mate 9
Huawei Mate 9
Huawei Mate 9
Huawei Mate 9
Huawei Mate 9

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the zoom step. 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
12 MP (both sensors combined)
20 MP (both sensors combined)
both sensors combined (2x hybrid zoom)
20 MP (only monochrome sensor)
681
cd/m²
675
cd/m²
692
cd/m²
683
cd/m²
696
cd/m²
700
cd/m²
686
cd/m²
657
cd/m²
653
cd/m²
Distribution av ljusstyrkan
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Max: 700 cd/m² Medel: 680.3 cd/m² Minimum: 5.3 cd/m²
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 93 %
Mitt på batteriet: 696 cd/m²
Kontrast: 1657:1 (Svärta: 0.42 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.3 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 4.8 | - Ø
Gamma: 2.33
Huawei Mate 9
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.9
Huawei Mate 8
IPS-NEO, 1920x1080, 6
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5
Google Pixel XL 2016
AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.5
LG G5
IPS Quantum, 2560x1440, 5.3
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
Super AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.7
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.7
Screen
-8%
23%
-2%
-16%
20%
6%
Brightness
680
513
-25%
553
-19%
408
-40%
774
14%
397
-42%
297
-56%
Brightness Distribution
93
94
1%
97
4%
85
-9%
91
-2%
91
-2%
93
0%
Black Level *
0.42
0.35
17%
0.35
17%
0.43
-2%
Contrast
1657
1469
-11%
1591
-4%
1823
10%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.3
5.08
-18%
1.4
67%
4
7%
6.5
-51%
1.49
65%
2.67
38%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
4.8
5.49
-14%
1.3
73%
3.2
33%
8
-67%
1.98
59%
2.81
41%
Gamma
2.33 103%
2.08 115%
2.21 109%
2.19 110%
2.22 108%
2.19 110%
2.08 115%
CCT
7255 90%
7254 90%
6667 97%
7037 92%
8699 75%
6382 102%
6379 102%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
79.95
63.1
68.08
66.31
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
99.84
99.83
97.46
99.79

* ... 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: 60 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 1345 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 30860) 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
30 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 7 ms rise
↘ 23 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 70 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (27.2 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
57 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 14 ms rise
↘ 43 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. » 90 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (44.2 ms).
AnTuTu Benchmark v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
124087 Points ∼67%
Huawei Mate 8
93767 Points ∼51% -24%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL (v6.0.5 UWP Beta5)
94122 Points ∼51% -24%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
165399 Points ∼90% +33%
Google Pixel XL 2016 (Version 6.2.1)
138641 Points ∼75% +12%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
128749 Points ∼70% +4%
Lenovo Moto Z
129197 Points ∼70% +4%
Huawei P9
95743 Points ∼52% -23%
Geekbench 4.0
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
5629 Points ∼21%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
5630 Points ∼21% 0%
Google Pixel XL 2016
4167 Points ∼16% -26%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
5503 Points ∼21% -2%
Lenovo Moto Z
3946 Points ∼15% -30%
Huawei P9
4904 Points ∼18% -13%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
1947 Points ∼36%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
3476 Points ∼63% +79%
Google Pixel XL 2016
1513 Points ∼28% -22%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
1840 Points ∼34% -5%
Lenovo Moto Z
1480 Points ∼27% -24%
Huawei P9
1755 Points ∼32% -10%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
1997 Points ∼67%
Google Pixel XL 2016
2044 Points ∼68% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
1811 Points ∼61% -9%
Lenovo Moto Z
1813 Points ∼61% -9%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
2142 Points ∼52%
Google Pixel XL 2016
2863 Points ∼70% +34%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
2394 Points ∼59% +12%
Lenovo Moto Z
2588 Points ∼63% +21%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
2108 Points ∼56%
Google Pixel XL 2016
2629 Points ∼70% +25%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
2234 Points ∼59% +6%
Lenovo Moto Z
2363 Points ∼63% +12%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
2104 Points ∼87%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
1528 Points ∼63% -27%
Google Pixel XL 2016
2009 Points ∼83% -5%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
1773 Points ∼74% -16%
Lenovo Moto Z
1860 Points ∼77% -12%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
2421 Points ∼41%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
5141 Points ∼88% +112%
Google Pixel XL 2016
4406 Points ∼75% +82%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
3071 Points ∼52% +27%
Lenovo Moto Z
3930 Points ∼67% +62%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
2343 Points ∼49%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
3371 Points ∼70% +44%
Google Pixel XL 2016
3483 Points ∼73% +49%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
2641 Points ∼55% +13%
Lenovo Moto Z
3151 Points ∼66% +34%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
2117 Points ∼83%
Huawei Mate 8
2552 Points ∼100% +21%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
1606 Points ∼63% -24%
Google Pixel XL 2016
1935 Points ∼76% -9%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
2121 (min: 1594) Points ∼83% 0%
Lenovo Moto Z
1797 Points ∼70% -15%
Huawei P9
2503 Points ∼98% +18%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
2294 Points ∼43%
Huawei Mate 8
801 Points ∼15% -65%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
1155 Points ∼21% -50%
Google Pixel XL 2016
2820 Points ∼52% +23%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
2229 (min: 2043) Points ∼41% -3%
Lenovo Moto Z
2336 Points ∼43% +2%
Huawei P9
829 Points ∼15% -64%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
2240 Points ∼58%
Huawei Mate 8
945 Points ∼24% -58%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
1232 Points ∼32% -45%
Google Pixel XL 2016
2560 Points ∼66% +14%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
2204 (min: 1923) Points ∼57% -2%
Lenovo Moto Z
2190 Points ∼56% -2%
Huawei P9
974 Points ∼25% -57%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
2123 Points ∼82%
Huawei Mate 8
2432 Points ∼94% +15%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
1552 Points ∼60% -27%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
1522 Points ∼59% -28%
Google Pixel XL 2016
1902 Points ∼74% -10%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
2002 (min: 1539) Points ∼77% -6%
Lenovo Moto Z
1828 Points ∼71% -14%
Huawei P9
2510 Points ∼97% +18%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
2448 Points ∼32%
Huawei Mate 8
1092 Points ∼14% -55%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
1471 Points ∼19% -40%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
4235 Points ∼55% +73%
Google Pixel XL 2016
3935 Points ∼51% +61%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
3015 (min: 2895) Points ∼39% +23%
Lenovo Moto Z
3718 Points ∼48% +52%
Huawei P9
1080 Points ∼14% -56%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
2367 Points ∼49%
Huawei Mate 8
1244 Points ∼26% -47%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
1488 Points ∼31% -37%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
3034 Points ∼62% +28%
Google Pixel XL 2016
3180 Points ∼65% +34%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
2710 (min: 2421) Points ∼56% +14%
Lenovo Moto Z
3023 Points ∼62% +28%
Huawei P9
1237 Points ∼25% -48%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
15104 Points ∼22%
Huawei Mate 8
15575 Points ∼23% +3%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
17380 Points ∼25% +15%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
15626 Points ∼23% +3%
Google Pixel XL 2016
18222 Points ∼26% +21%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
19610 Points ∼28% +30%
Lenovo Moto Z
20948 Points ∼30% +39%
Huawei P9
15517 Points ∼22% +3%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
35626 Points ∼8%
Huawei Mate 8
20537 Points ∼5% -42%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
26964 Points ∼6% -24%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
63386 Points ∼14% +78%
Google Pixel XL 2016
32652 Points ∼7% -8%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
33031 Points ∼7% -7%
Lenovo Moto Z
26659 Points ∼6% -25%
Huawei P9
21577 Points ∼5% -39%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
27364 Points ∼14%
Huawei Mate 8
19179 Points ∼10% -30%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
24020 Points ∼12% -12%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
37746 Points ∼19% +38%
Google Pixel XL 2016
27766 Points ∼14% +1%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
28671 Points ∼15% +5%
Lenovo Moto Z
25135 Points ∼13% -8%
Huawei P9
19854 Points ∼10% -27%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
80 fps ∼6%
Huawei Mate 8
41 fps ∼3% -49%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
27.11 fps ∼2% -66%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
91.96 fps ∼7% +15%
Google Pixel XL 2016
91 fps ∼7% +14%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
81 fps ∼6% +1%
Lenovo Moto Z
77 fps ∼6% -4%
Huawei P9
40 fps ∼3% -50%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
60 fps ∼13%
Huawei Mate 8
44 fps ∼10% -27%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
18.75 fps ∼4% -69%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
57.71 fps ∼13% -4%
Google Pixel XL 2016
55 fps ∼12% -8%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
51 fps ∼11% -15%
Lenovo Moto Z
53 fps ∼12% -12%
Huawei P9
43 fps ∼9% -28%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
34 fps ∼6%
Huawei Mate 8
18 fps ∼3% -47%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
18 fps ∼3% -47%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
17.54 fps ∼3% -48%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
58.71 fps ∼11% +73%
Google Pixel XL 2016
48 fps ∼9% +41%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
38 fps ∼7% +12%
Lenovo Moto Z
41 fps ∼8% +21%
Huawei P9
18 fps ∼3% -47%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
37 fps ∼16%
Huawei Mate 8
19 fps ∼8% -49%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
11 fps ∼5% -70%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
11.81 fps ∼5% -68%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
55.17 fps ∼24% +49%
Google Pixel XL 2016
30 fps ∼13% -19%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
27 fps ∼12% -27%
Lenovo Moto Z
26 fps ∼11% -30%
Huawei P9
19 fps ∼8% -49%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
24 fps ∼6%
Huawei Mate 8
10 fps ∼2% -58%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
41.3 fps ∼10% +72%
Google Pixel XL 2016
32 fps ∼8% +33%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
28 fps ∼7% +17%
Lenovo Moto Z
27 fps ∼6% +13%
Huawei P9
10 fps ∼2% -58%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
28 fps ∼16%
Huawei Mate 8
11 fps ∼6% -61%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
41.5 fps ∼24% +48%
Google Pixel XL 2016
17 fps ∼10% -39%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
15 fps ∼9% -46%
Lenovo Moto Z
15 fps ∼9% -46%
Huawei P9
11 fps ∼6% -61%
PCMark for Android - Work performance score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
7403 Points ∼91%
Huawei Mate 8
7344 Points ∼90% -1%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
5113 Points ∼63% -31%
Google Pixel XL 2016
4739 Points ∼58% -36%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
4660 Points ∼57% -37%
Lenovo Moto Z
7637 Points ∼94% +3%
Huawei P9
7058 Points ∼87% -5%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
1076 Points ∼70%
Huawei Mate 8
1127 Points ∼73% +5%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
998 Points ∼65% -7%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
837 Points ∼54% -22%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
1542 Points ∼100% +43%
Google Pixel XL 2016
977 Points ∼63% -9%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
994 Points ∼64% -8%
Lenovo Moto Z
959 Points ∼62% -11%
Huawei P9
1029 Points ∼67% -4%
Graphics (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
3939 Points ∼46%
Huawei Mate 8
1636 Points ∼19% -58%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
2476 Points ∼29% -37%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
2040 Points ∼24% -48%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
6875 Points ∼80% +75%
Google Pixel XL 2016
5017 Points ∼58% +27%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
2203 Points ∼26% -44%
Lenovo Moto Z
4321 Points ∼50% +10%
Huawei P9
1583 Points ∼18% -60%
Memory (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
3850 Points ∼100%
Huawei Mate 8
2339 Points ∼61% -39%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
1138 Points ∼30% -70%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
1945 Points ∼51% -49%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
1319 Points ∼34% -66%
Google Pixel XL 2016
1677 Points ∼44% -56%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
2072 Points ∼54% -46%
Lenovo Moto Z
2190 Points ∼57% -43%
Huawei P9
2627 Points ∼68% -32%
System (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
3616 Points ∼55%
Huawei Mate 8
4064 Points ∼62% +12%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
3305 Points ∼50% -9%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
1386 Points ∼21% -62%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
6582 Points ∼100% +82%
Google Pixel XL 2016
3889 Points ∼59% +8%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
4080 Points ∼62% +13%
Lenovo Moto Z
3398 Points ∼52% -6%
Huawei P9
3930 Points ∼60% +9%
Overall (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
2772 Points ∼84%
Huawei Mate 8
2046 Points ∼62% -26%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
1746 Points ∼53% -37%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
1465 Points ∼44% -47%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
3097 Points ∼94% +12%
Google Pixel XL 2016
2378 Points ∼72% -14%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
2074 Points ∼63% -25%
Lenovo Moto Z
2356 Points ∼71% -15%
Huawei P9
2025 Points ∼61% -27%
Basemark X 1.1
High Quality (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
31104 Points ∼71%
Huawei Mate 8
16688 Points ∼38% -46%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
26108 Points ∼59% -16%
Google Pixel XL 2016
30724 Points ∼70% -1%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
32273 Points ∼73% +4%
Lenovo Moto Z
33028 Points ∼75% +6%
Huawei P9
16610 Points ∼38% -47%
Medium Quality (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
42176 Points ∼94%
Huawei Mate 8
29659 Points ∼66% -30%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
36533 Points ∼81% -13%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
33082 Points ∼74% -22%
Google Pixel XL 2016
34695 Points ∼77% -18%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
41091 Points ∼91% -3%
Lenovo Moto Z
41445 Points ∼92% -2%
Huawei P9
29662 Points ∼66% -30%
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9 (12.4 fps offscreen)
699 Points ∼37%
Huawei Mate 8
347 Points ∼19% -50%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
1177 Points ∼63% +68%
Google Pixel XL 2016 (11.0 fps offscreen)
621 Points ∼33% -11%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
733 Points ∼39% +5%
Lenovo Moto Z
542 Points ∼29% -22%
Huawei P9
328 Points ∼18% -53%
ANDEBench PRO
3D (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
46.18 fps ∼35%
Huawei Mate 8
30.14 fps ∼23% -35%
Google Pixel XL 2016
67.37 fps ∼51% +46%
Lenovo Moto Z
58.87 fps ∼45% +27%
Huawei P9
31.59 fps ∼24% -32%
Platform (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
489 Points ∼7%
Huawei Mate 8
286 Points ∼4% -42%
Google Pixel XL 2016
253.2 Points ∼4% -48%
Lenovo Moto Z
404.1 Points ∼6% -17%
Huawei P9
435.2 Points ∼6% -11%
Storage (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
12783 KB/s ∼34%
Huawei Mate 8
9634 KB/s ∼26% -25%
Google Pixel XL 2016
19319 KB/s ∼52% +51%
Lenovo Moto Z
14580 KB/s ∼39% +14%
Huawei P9
10534 KB/s ∼28% -18%
Memory Latency (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
6318 KOps/s ∼78%
Huawei Mate 8
4981 KOps/s ∼62% -21%
Google Pixel XL 2016
1948 KOps/s ∼24% -69%
Lenovo Moto Z
5740 KOps/s ∼71% -9%
Huawei P9
4614 KOps/s ∼57% -27%
Memory Bandwidth (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
20696 MB/s ∼98%
Huawei Mate 8
10559 MB/s ∼50% -49%
Google Pixel XL 2016
18672 MB/s ∼89% -10%
Lenovo Moto Z
19176 MB/s ∼91% -7%
Huawei P9
8721 MB/s ∼41% -58%
CoreMark-PRO/HPC (Base) (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
5902 Points ∼98%
Huawei Mate 8
5664 Points ∼94% -4%
Google Pixel XL 2016
5452 Points ∼90% -8%
Lenovo Moto Z
4834 Points ∼80% -18%
Huawei P9
5919 Points ∼98% 0%
Device Score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
16616 Points ∼85%
Huawei Mate 8
11703 Points ∼60% -30%
Google Pixel XL 2016
14128 Points ∼72% -15%
Lenovo Moto Z
15951 Points ∼81% -4%
Huawei P9
13100 Points ∼67% -21%
Lightmark - 1920x1080 1080p (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
19.14 fps ∼53%
Huawei Mate 8
7.9 fps ∼22% -59%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
6.6 fps ∼18% -66%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
13.31 fps ∼37% -30%
Lenovo Moto Z
24.33 fps ∼68% +27%
Huawei P9
7.9 fps ∼22% -59%

Legend

 
Huawei Mate 9 HiSilicon Kirin 960, ARM Mali-G71 MP8, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Huawei Mate 8 HiSilicon Kirin 950, ARM Mali-T880 MP4, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A Samsung Exynos 7420 Octa, ARM Mali-T760 MP8, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
 
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 MSM8994, Qualcomm Adreno 430, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Apple iPhone 7 Plus Apple A10 Fusion, Apple A10 Fusion GPU / PowerVR, 128 GB NVMe
 
Google Pixel XL 2016 Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
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
 
Huawei P9 HiSilicon Kirin 955, ARM Mali-T880 MP4, 32 GB eMMC Flash
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash (Chrome 54)
152 Points ∼26%
Huawei Mate 8
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 950, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 47)
139 Points ∼24% -9%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
96 Points ∼17% -37%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Edge 13.10586)
113 Points ∼20% -26%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
204 Points ∼35% +34%
Google Pixel XL 2016
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 53)
126 Points ∼22% -17%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
Mali-T880 MP12, 8890 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash (Samsung Browser 4.0.01-81)
163 Points ∼28% +7%
Lenovo Moto Z
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 53)
112 Points ∼19% -26%
Huawei P9
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 48)
128 Points ∼22% -16%
Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash (Chrome 54)
11897 Points ∼24%
Huawei Mate 8
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 950, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 47)
11329 Points ∼23% -5%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
7534 Points ∼15% -37%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Edge 13.10586)
8059 Points ∼16% -32%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe (Safari Mobile 10.0)
26053 Points ∼53% +119%
Google Pixel XL 2016
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 53)
8690 Points ∼18% -27%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
Mali-T880 MP12, 8890 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash (Samsung Browser 4.0.01-81)
13191 Points ∼27% +11%
Lenovo Moto Z
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 53)
7771 Points ∼16% -35%
Huawei P9
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 48)
11783 Points ∼24% -1%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash (Chrome 54)
2733.7 ms * ∼5%
Huawei Mate 8
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 950, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 47)
3643 ms * ∼6% -33%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
5089.2 ms * ∼9% -86%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Edge 13.10586)
5552.9 ms * ∼9% -103%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe (Safari Mobile 10.0)
1102.7 ms * ∼2% +60%
Google Pixel XL 2016
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 53)
2653.6 ms * ∼4% +3%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
Mali-T880 MP12, 8890 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash (Samsung Browser 4.0.01-81)
2564.1 ms * ∼4% +6%
Lenovo Moto Z
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 53)
3154.7 ms * ∼5% -15%
Huawei P9
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 48)
2922.6 ms * ∼5% -7%
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash (Chrome 54)
68.6 Points ∼0%
Huawei Mate 8
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 950, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 47)
65 Points ∼0% -5%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
48.821 Points ∼0% -29%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Edge 13.10586)
46 Points ∼0% -33%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe (Safari Mobile 10.0)
168.08 Points ∼1% +145%
Google Pixel XL 2016
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 53)
55.4 Points ∼0% -19%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
Mali-T880 MP12, 8890 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash (Samsung Browser 4.0.01-81)
75.12 Points ∼0% +10%
Lenovo Moto Z
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 53)
47.5 Points ∼0% -31%
Huawei P9
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 48)
68.4 Points ∼0% 0%
BaseMark OS II - Web (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
1076 Points ∼70%
Huawei Mate 8
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 950, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1127 Points ∼73% +5%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
998 Points ∼65% -7%
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
Adreno 430, 810 MSM8994, 32 GB eMMC Flash
837 Points ∼54% -22%
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe
1542 Points ∼100% +43%
Google Pixel XL 2016
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 32 GB eMMC Flash
977 Points ∼63% -9%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
Mali-T880 MP12, 8890 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
994 Points ∼64% -8%
Lenovo Moto Z
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash
959 Points ∼62% -11%
Huawei P9
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash
1029 Points ∼67% -4%
Vellamo 3.x - Browser (sort by value)
Huawei Mate 9
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash (Android WebView 3.2.6)
7565 Points ∼100%
Huawei Mate 8
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 950, 32 GB eMMC Flash
7008 Points ∼93% -7%
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
4666 Points ∼62% -38%
Google Pixel XL 2016
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Android WebView 3.2.6)
6271 Points ∼83% -17%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
Mali-T880 MP12, 8890 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash (Samsung Browser 4.0.01-81)
7198 (min: 6255) Points ∼95% -5%
Lenovo Moto Z
Adreno 530, 820 MSM8996, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Chrome 53)
5344 Points ∼71% -29%
Huawei P9
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash (Stock Browser Android 6.0)
6580 (min: 6523) Points ∼87% -13%

* ... smaller is better

Huawei Mate 9
Mali-G71 MP8, Kirin 960, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
Huawei Mate 8
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 950, 32 GB eMMC Flash
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
Mali-T760 MP8, 7420 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
Google Pixel XL 2016
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 32 GB eMMC Flash
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
Mali-T880 MP12, 8890 Octa, 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
AndroBench 3-5
-17%
25%
-10%
28%
145%
44%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
29.53 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
50.36 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
71%
45.64 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
55%
24.83 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-16%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
53.97 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
76.43 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
42%
78.51 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
45%
55.05 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
2%
Random Write 4KB
8.77
15.74
79%
20.42
133%
14.56
66%
15.79
80%
74.93
754%
47.45
441%
Random Read 4KB
94.69
24.98
-74%
90.32
-5%
87.67
-7%
86.71
-8%
117.15
24%
39
-59%
Sequential Write 256KB
142.92
124.78
-13%
150.05
5%
83.38
-42%
145.11
2%
168.32
18%
72.19
-49%
Sequential Read 256KB
594.23
238.28
-60%
385.39
-35%
258.23
-57%
487.34
-18%
439.66
-26%
281.26
-53%
Asphalt 8: Airborne
 InställningarVärde
 high30 fps
 very low30 fps
Dead Trigger 2
 InställningarVärde
 high60 fps
Hög belastning
 44.4 °C42.9 °C40.2 °C 
 43.5 °C43.1 °C41.7 °C 
 41 °C40.8 °C40.9 °C 
Max: 44.4 °C
Medel: 42.1 °C
38 °C40.4 °C41.6 °C
38.4 °C39.5 °C40.6 °C
38.8 °C40 °C40.1 °C
Max: 41.6 °C
Medel: 39.7 °C
Strömförsörjning (max.)  36.4 °C | Rumstemperatur 21.3 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2031.635.72525.424.83125.324.94032.925.65033.635.16331.630.18028.423.31002724.812520.828.71602235.520021.343.325020.849.331521.253.740019.455.150019.56063017.763.380017.961.9100017.863.5125017.367.1160017.461.1200016.770250017.272.6315018.274.1400017.976.2500017.675.7630017.773.9800017.871.51000017.972.51250018.166.71600018.254.1SPL3083.9N1.353.7median 17.9Huawei Mate 9median 63.3Delta1.310.731.630.925.43225.328.532.926.733.63531.626.628.4282733.820.837.62245.821.350.220.856.921.262.919.462.419.566.317.768.217.966.217.869.717.370.517.474.816.775.917.275.718.278.317.981.717.68017.776.617.877.517.974.418.163.318.248.83088.51.372.6median 17.9Google Pixel XL 2016median 68.21.310.726.428.426.42826.72825.828.725.829.133.229.126.12626.123.925.523.927.724.727.733.426.933.441.53741.540.320.240.343.720.243.745.521.845.547224752.822.252.860.121.860.166.517.266.569.217.869.271.619.871.669.919.169.96815.46869.515.669.56614.96671.514.771.571.214.271.272.21472.271.213.971.26713.86758.913.958.952.413.952.454.713.754.781.529.581.549.91.349.9median 66Apple iPhone 7 Plusmedian 17.2median 6610.93.810.9hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Huawei Mate 9 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.86 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.2% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 10.4% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 38% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 50% worse
» The best had a delta of 15%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 63% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 29% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 48%

Google Pixel XL 2016 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 9.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 10% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 81% worse
» The best had a delta of 15%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 44% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 50% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 48%

Apple iPhone 7 Plus audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.45 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 (21.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 11% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 80% worse
» The best had a delta of 15%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 45% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 49% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 48%

Strömförbrukning
Av/Standbydarklight 0.02 / 0.15 Watt
Låg belastningdarkmidlight 0.78 / 2.13 / 2.17 Watt
Hög belastning midlight 6.32 / 6.49 Watt
 color bar
Förklaring: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Huawei Mate 9
4000 mAh
Huawei Mate 8
4000 mAh
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
3340 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge
3600 mAh
Google Pixel XL 2016
3450 mAh
Lenovo Moto Z
2600 mAh
LG G5
2800 mAh
Power Consumption
11%
-88%
20%
29%
25%
4%
Idle Minimum *
0.78
0.85
-9%
2.85
-265%
0.63
19%
0.53
32%
0.66
15%
0.55
29%
Idle Average *
2.13
2.07
3%
2.95
-38%
1.1
48%
1.07
50%
1.01
53%
1.37
36%
Idle Maximum *
2.17
2.28
-5%
3.26
-50%
1.56
28%
1.12
48%
1.09
50%
2.25
-4%
Load Average *
6.32
3.91
38%
8.92
-41%
5.95
6%
5.53
12%
3.97
37%
6.24
1%
Load Maximum *
6.49
4.69
28%
9.39
-45%
6.7
-3%
6.26
4%
8.34
-29%
9.12
-41%

* ... smaller is better

Batteritid
Låg belastning (utan WLAN, min. ljusstyrka)
25tim 38min
Surfa med WLAN v1.3
12tim 38min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
15tim 47min
Hög belastning (maximal ljusstyrka)
3tim 39min
Huawei Mate 9
4000 mAh
Huawei Mate 8
4000 mAh
Apple iPhone 7 Plus
2915 mAh
Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
3340 mAh
Google Pixel XL 2016
3450 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920A
 mAh
Battery Runtime
14%
-4%
-34%
-22%
6%
Reader / Idle
1538
1872
22%
1835
19%
1078
-30%
1333
-13%
1775
15%
Load
219
256
17%
225
3%
179
-18%
230
5%
322
47%
WiFi
WiFi v1.3
758
865
14%
587
-23%
369
-51%
505
-33%
431
-43%
H.264
947
963
2%
813
-14%
611
-35%
505
-47%

För

+ snabb kamera
+ snabb lagring
+ kompakt och tilltalande design
+ upp till 3 års garanti
+ LTE Cat. 11
+ många frekvensband
+ bra röstkvalitet och brusreducering
+ App-kloning
+ IR-sändare
+ dual SIM...

Emot

- ... men bara som "hybridplats"
- microSD-kort kan inte formateras som intern lagring
- inget App2SD
- smattrande adapter
- långsam SD-plats
- medioker WiFi-prestanda
In review: Huawei Mate 9. Test model courtesy of Huawei.
In review: Huawei Mate 9. Test model courtesy of Huawei.

Huaweis Mate 9 är en utveckling av föregångaren som tar ytterligare ett steg framåt i fråga om funktioner och prestanda. Mobilen är fortfarande en av de bästa enheterna i klass, även om den nu har en något mindre skärm. Trots storleken är den enkel att hantera.

De tekniska specifikationerna är utmärkta. Systemkretsen Kirin 960 är mycket snabb och kan mestadels hålla jämna steg med andra kretsar i toppsegmentet. Multitasking-lösningen är också något vi uppskattar. 4 GB RAM och en generös lagringskapacitet på 64 GB (UFS 2.1) ingår, varav den senare övertygar med hög prestanda. Lagringsutrymmet kan utökas med microSD-kort, men kortläsarens prestanda är bara genomsnittlig. Panelens upplösning kunde också varit högre med tanke på skärmens 5,9 tum.

Mate 9 har en så gott som komplett uppsättning anslutningsmöjligheter, inklusive snabbt LTE Cat. 11 och ett brett utbud av frekvensband för uppkoppling i hela världen. Tack vare ”App Cloning” går det att använda två WhatsApp-konton på samma enhet med dubbla SIM-kort. WiFi-räckvidden är bra, men överföringshastigheterna borde vara bättre i den här prisklassen.

Det stora batteriet kompletterar luren och levererar långa drifttider. Så om du letar efter en riktigt stor smartphone med avancerade specifikationer finns det för närvarande knappt några alternativ till Huawei Mate 9.

Huawei Mate 9 - 11/08/2016 v5.1
Daniel Schmidt

Design
91%
Tangentbord
73 / 75 → 97%
Mus
97%
Anslutningar
53 / 60 → 89%
Vikt
89%
Batteri
96%
Skärm
87%
Spelprestanda
60 / 63 → 95%
Programprestanda
65 / 70 → 93%
Temperatur
86%
Ljudnivå
100%
Audio
73 / 91 → 80%
Camera
82%
Medel
81%
89%
Smartphone - Vägt medel

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Bärbara datorer, laptops - tester och nyheter > Tester > Test: Huawei Mate 9 (sammanfattning)
Daniel Schmidt, 2016-12- 4 (Update: 2016-12- 4)