Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Türkçe
Chinese
MagyarTest: Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G - En vikbar smartphone utan rivaler (Sammanfattning)
Testgrupp
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Drive | Size | Resolution | Best Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 88.9 % | 09/2021 | Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G SD 888 5G, Adreno 660 | 271 g | 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 7.60" | 2208x1768 | |
| 87.6 % | 08/2020 | Samsung Galaxy Z Fold2 5G SD 865+ (Plus), Adreno 650 | 279 g | 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 7.60" | 2208x1768 | |
| 86.3 % | 09/2021 | Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G SD 888 5G, Adreno 660 | 183 g | 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 6.70" | 2640x1080 | |
| 82.6 % | 03/2020 | Huawei Mate Xs Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16 | 300 g | 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash | 8.00" | 2480x2200 | |
| 88.7 % | 10/2020 | Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max A14, A14 Bionic GPU | 228 g | 128 GB NVMe | 6.70" | 2778x1284 | |
| 89.2 % | 04/2021 | Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra SD 888 5G, Adreno 660 | 234 g | 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 6.81" | 3200x1440 |
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.
Wide angleWide angleUltra wide-angle5x zoomLow light
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 97 %
Mitt på batteriet: 808 cd/m²
Kontrast: ∞:1 (Svärta: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.9 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 2.5 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
97.3% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.01
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 97 %
Mitt på batteriet: 918 cd/m²
Kontrast: ∞:1 (Svärta: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.1 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 1.8 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
96.9% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.09
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G Dynamic AMOLED, 2208x1768, 7.60 | Samsung Galaxy Z Fold2 5G AMOLED, 2208x1768, 7.60 | Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G AMOLED, 2640x1080, 6.70 | Huawei Mate Xs OLED, 2480x2200, 8.00 | Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max OLED, 2778x1284, 6.70 | Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra AMOLED, 3200x1440, 6.81 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | -2% | 18% | -25% | 26% | 19% | |
| Brightness middle | 808 | 637 -21% | 832 3% | 417 -48% | 855 6% | 891 10% |
| Brightness | 820 | 635 -23% | 842 3% | 418 -49% | 857 5% | 888 8% |
| Brightness Distribution | 97 | 96 -1% | 97 0% | 99 2% | 98 1% | 99 2% |
| Black Level * | ||||||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 2.9 | 2.25 22% | 1.9 34% | 2.6 10% | 1.1 62% | 1.9 34% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 4.2 | 4.12 2% | 3.3 21% | 7.7 -83% | 2.51 40% | 3.7 12% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.5 | 2.2 12% | 1.4 44% | 2 20% | 1.4 44% | 1.3 48% |
| Gamma | 2.01 109% | 2.17 101% | 2.1 105% | 2.31 95% | 2.187 101% | 2.3 96% |
| CCT | 6359 102% | 6689 97% | 6453 101% | 6276 104% | 6337 103% | 6527 100% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 245.1 Hz | ≤ 100 % brightness setting | |
The display backlight flickers at 245.1 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 100 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 245.1 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 17903 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 2.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 1.2 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 1.2 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. » 7 % 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 | ||
| 10.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 5.2 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 5.2 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 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 19 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (33.7 ms). | ||
| VRMark - Amber Room (sort by value) | |
| Huawei Mate Xs | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2523 - 10071, n=12, last 2 years) | |
| Basemark GPU 1.2 | |
| 1280x720 OpenGL Simple Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Huawei Mate Xs | |
| Average of class Smartphone (195.7 - 549, n=12, last 2 years) | |
| 1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Huawei Mate Xs | |
| Average of class Smartphone (7.65 - 13860, n=54, last 2 years) | |
| OpenGL Medium Native (sort by value) | |
| Huawei Mate Xs | |
| Average of class Smartphone (9.3 - 9309, n=53, last 2 years) | |
| 1280x720 Vulkan Simple Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Huawei Mate Xs | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2.12 - 39496, n=56, last 2 years) | |
| 1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Huawei Mate Xs | |
| Average of class Smartphone (7.51 - 15712, n=55, last 2 years) | |
| Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value) | |
| Huawei Mate Xs | |
| Average of class Smartphone (10 - 14706, n=54, last 2 years) | |
| Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
| Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max (Safari 14) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 351, n=173, last 2 years) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (61.3 - 125.1, n=13) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra (Chrome91) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G (Chrome 92) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold2 5G (Chrome 85) | |
| Huawei Mate Xs (Huawei Browser 10.1) | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
| Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max (Safari 14) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G (Chrome 93) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (77 - 223, n=19) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra (Chrome91) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G (Chrome 92) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold2 5G (Chrome 85) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (last 2 years) | |
| Huawei Mate Xs (Huawei Browser 10.1) | |
| Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
| Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max (Safari 14) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (14.9 - 445, n=157, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra (Chrome91) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (46.9 - 121, n=12) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold2 5G (Chome 85) | |
| Huawei Mate Xs (Huawei Browser 10.1) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G (Chrome 92) | |
| WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
| Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max (Safari 14) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G (Chrome 93) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G (Chrome 92) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (103 - 182, n=18) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra (Chrome91) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (39 - 304, n=122, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold2 5G (Chrome 85) | |
| Huawei Mate Xs (Huawei Browser 10.1) | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max (Safari 14) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G (Chrome 93) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (23491 - 47543, n=20) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra (Chrome91) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G (Chrome 92) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 89112, n=214, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold2 5G (Chrome 85) | |
| Huawei Mate Xs (Huawei Browser 10.1) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Huawei Mate Xs (Huawei Browser 10.1) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold2 5G (Chrome 85) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra (Chrome91) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (388 - 9999, n=173, last 2 years) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G (891 - 1841, n=20) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G (Chrome 92) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G (Chrome 93) | |
| Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max (Safari 14) | |
* ... smaller is better
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G | Samsung Galaxy Z Fold2 5G | Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G | Huawei Mate Xs | Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra | Average 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | 1% | 9% | -8% | 21% | 31% | 19% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 1934 | 1681 -13% | 1620 -16% | 1767 -9% | 1928 0% | 1760 ? -9% | 1508 ? -22% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 790 | 757 -4% | 750 -5% | 402.7 -49% | 756 -4% | 1134 ? 44% | 1118 ? 42% |
| Random Read 4KB | 215.5 | 232.1 8% | 276.6 28% | 202.9 -6% | 259.3 20% | 281 ? 30% | 247 ? 15% |
| Random Write 4KB | 195.7 | 220.6 13% | 250.6 28% | 259.1 32% | 329.7 68% | 311 ? 59% | 272 ? 39% |
3DMark Wild Life stress-test
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 36.3 °C / 97 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 37.2 °C / 99 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.9 °C / 86 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (14.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 1% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 16% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 80% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Huawei Mate Xs audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 18.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.3% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.9% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 33% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 58% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 54% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 39% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Av/Standby |   0.03 / 0.25 Watt |
| Låg belastning |  1.02 / 1.18 / 1.27 Watt |
| Hög belastning |
5.25 / 7.74 Watt |
    
| |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G 4400 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Z Fold2 5G 4500 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G 3300 mAh | Huawei Mate Xs 4500 mAh | Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max 3687 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra 5000 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 5G | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -52% | 33% | -112% | 4% | -22% | -21% | -10% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 1.02 | 1 2% | 0.46 55% | 2.22 -118% | 0.8 22% | 1.13 -11% | 1.066 ? -5% | 0.897 ? 12% |
| Idle Average * | 1.18 | 2.1 -78% | 0.74 37% | 3.94 -234% | 1.5 -27% | 1.67 -42% | 1.58 ? -34% | 1.452 ? -23% |
| Idle Maximum * | 1.27 | 2.8 -120% | 0.78 39% | 4.01 -216% | 1.9 -50% | 1.69 -33% | 1.733 ? -36% | 1.629 ? -28% |
| Load Average * | 5.25 | 6.8 -30% | 4.73 10% | 4.34 17% | 3.4 35% | 5.17 2% | 5.46 ? -4% | 5.55 ? -6% |
| Load Maximum * | 7.74 | 10.5 -36% | 5.89 24% | 8.46 -9% | 4.7 39% | 9.9 -28% | 9.79 ? -26% | 8.31 ? -7% |
* ... smaller is better
Energiförbrukning: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)
Energiförbrukning: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G 4400 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Z Fold2 5G 4500 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G 3300 mAh | Huawei Mate Xs 4500 mAh | Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max 3687 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra 5000 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 11% | -11% | -13% | 57% | -5% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1257 | 1853 47% | 1071 -15% | 2611 108% | 1108 -12% | |
| H.264 | 1004 | 832 -17% | 762 -24% | 1356 35% | 1006 0% | |
| WiFi v1.3 | 610 | 736 21% | 541 -11% | 481 -21% | 961 58% | 650 7% |
| Load | 330 | 302 -8% | 357 8% | 423 28% | 276 -16% |
För
Emot
Omdöme - Stark vikbar från Samsung
Läs den fullständiga versionen av den här recensionen på engelska här.
Den tredje generationen av Samsungs vikbara smartphone är en kraftfull bit teknik som inte längre bara riktar sig åt entusiaster. Galaxy Z Fold3 5G kombinerar de kraftfulla tekniska egenskaperna från en toppskiktstelefon med möjligheterna som kommer av den vikbara skärmen, som nu också har stöd för S Pen. Detta känns logiskt för den här formfaktorn och det är lätt att använda pennan för att skriva på skärmen.
Med Galaxy Z Fold3 5G levererar Samsung en totalt sett kraftfull enhet som inte behöver oroa sig för den kommande konkurrensen.
Det finns inte mycket att ge Fold3 kritik för. Om något får vi nämna att den är en aning tjock när den är ihopvikt och även diskutera kamerorna en aning. Trots att den inte använder en väldigt högupplöst sensor är huvudkameran riktigt bra och behöver inte oroa sig för att bli jämförd med andra. Däremot var ultra-vidvinkelskameran inte värdig det här prisskiktet på grund av dålig detaljnivå. UD-kameran var också bara medelmåttig kvalitetsmässigt.
Det finns inga egentliga alternativ då Mate Xs i princip har försvunnit från marknaden och konkurrenterna Oppo, Xiaomi och TCL har ännu inte tagit fram några vikbara modeller som går att köpa. Den som bara letar efter en smartphone med stor skärm bör också ta en titt på vår lista över de bästa stora telefonerna.
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G
-
08/31/2022 v7
Daniel Schmidt
Pricecompare
