Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Türkçe
Chinese
MagyarTest: Xiaomi Mi 8 Smartphone (Sammanfattning)
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 | |
| Sony Xperia XZ3 | |
| OnePlus 6T | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 | |
| OnePlus 6T | |
| Sony Xperia XZ3 | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 | |
| Average of class Smartphone (last 2 years) | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 94 %
Mitt på batteriet: 430 cd/m²
Kontrast: ∞:1 (Svärta: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.09 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 3.3 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
140.4% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.257
| Xiaomi Mi 8 AMOLED, 2248x1080, 6.21 | OnePlus 6T Optic AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.41 | Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition Super AMOLED, 2248x1080, 6.20 | Samsung Galaxy S9 Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 5.80 | Sony Xperia XZ3 OLED, 2880x1440, 6.00 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 24% | 10% | 37% | -10% | |
| Brightness middle | 430 | 437 2% | 429 0% | 529 23% | 543 26% |
| Brightness | 434 | 442 2% | 432 0% | 527 21% | 542 25% |
| Brightness Distribution | 94 | 95 1% | 88 -6% | 96 2% | 92 -2% |
| Black Level * | |||||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5.09 | 2.21 57% | 3.39 33% | 1.4 72% | 6.6 -30% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 8.05 | 4.27 47% | 5.25 35% | 4 50% | 11 -37% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 3.3 | 2.1 36% | 3.3 -0% | 1.6 52% | 4.7 -42% |
| Gamma | 2.257 97% | 2.307 95% | 2.238 98% | 2.16 102% | 1.835 120% |
| CCT | 7026 93% | 6353 102% | 7135 91% | 6358 102% | 6817 95% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 238 Hz |  | |
The display backlight flickers at 238 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 238 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17900 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 3 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 5 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows fast response rates in our tests and should be suited for gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 17 % 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 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 5 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 5 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. » 18 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (33.7 ms). | ||
| AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| OnePlus 6T | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 | |
| Sony Xperia XZ3 | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (246366 - 299878, n=27) | |
| AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 | |
| OnePlus 6T | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 | |
| Sony Xperia XZ3 | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (162183 - 242953, n=23) | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (last 2 years) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ3 (Chrome 70) | |
| OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition (Chrome 69) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (22.5 - 90.9, n=25) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0) | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (4633 - 89112, n=213, last 2 years) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ3 (Chrome 70) | |
| OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (3991 - 18275, n=28) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition (Chrome 69) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2154 - 11204, n=28) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition (Chrome 69) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ3 (Chrome 70) | |
| OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (388 - 9999, n=173, last 2 years) | |
| WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
| Average of class Smartphone (39 - 304, n=122, last 2 years) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ3 (Chrome 70) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (19 - 103, n=17) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 | |
| WebXPRT 2015 - Overall | |
| OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition (Chrome 69) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (96 - 291, n=23) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72) | |
| Sony Xperia XZ3 (Chrome 70) | |
| Samsung Galaxy S9 (Samsung Browser 7.0) | |
* ... smaller is better
| Xiaomi Mi 8 | OnePlus 6T | Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition | Samsung Galaxy S9 | Sony Xperia XZ3 | Average 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | 3% | 2% | 6% | -1% | 148% | 458% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 693 | 735 6% | 692 0% | 815 18% | 681 -2% | 760 ? 10% | 1508 ? 118% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 207.8 | 204.4 -2% | 205.2 -1% | 206.9 0% | 196.1 -6% | 297 ? 43% | 1118 ? 438% |
| Random Read 4KB | 136.3 | 138.5 2% | 135.2 -1% | 131 -4% | 135.7 0% | 152.9 ? 12% | 247 ? 81% |
| Random Write 4KB | 21 | 22 5% | 22.65 8% | 23.07 10% | 22.22 6% | 131.6 ? 527% | 272 ? 1195% |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 79.2 ? | 34.2 ? | 76 ? | ||||
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 67.2 ? | 30.4 ? | 59.6 ? |
Arena of Valor
Asphalt 9
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42.5 °C / 109 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 39.7 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 34.2 °C / 94 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.
Xiaomi Mi 8 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 64.6% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 64.6% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 64.6% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (124.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 93% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 1% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 98% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 0% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
OnePlus 6T audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 62.9% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 62.9% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 62.9% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (116.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 85% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 10% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 95% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 3% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Av/Standby |   0.1 / 0.2 Watt |
| Låg belastning |  1.5 / 2.2 / 2.6 Watt |
| Hög belastning |
6.1 / 10.9 Watt |
    
| |
| Xiaomi Mi 8 3400 mAh | OnePlus 6T 3700 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition 3000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S9 3000 mAh | Sony Xperia XZ3 3300 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 35% | -14% | 52% | 40% | 24% | 29% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 1.5 | 0.7 53% | 1.8 -20% | 0.65 57% | 0.8 47% | 0.862 ? 43% | 0.897 ? 40% |
| Idle Average * | 2.2 | 1.1 50% | 2.9 -32% | 0.81 63% | 1.2 45% | 1.728 ? 21% | 1.452 ? 34% |
| Idle Maximum * | 2.6 | 2.1 19% | 3.5 -35% | 0.92 65% | 1.5 42% | 2.07 ? 20% | 1.629 ? 37% |
| Load Average * | 6.1 | 4.2 31% | 4.8 21% | 4.76 22% | 4.8 21% | 4.87 ? 20% | 5.55 ? 9% |
| Load Maximum * | 10.9 | 8.3 24% | 11.2 -3% | 5.16 53% | 6.2 43% | 9.27 ? 15% | 8.31 ? 24% |
* ... smaller is better
| Xiaomi Mi 8 3400 mAh | OnePlus 6T 3700 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 8 Explorer Edition 3000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S9 3000 mAh | Sony Xperia XZ3 3300 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 15% | -7% | -30% | -31% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1634 | 1936 18% | 1401 -14% | 1182 -28% | 1270 -22% |
| H.264 | 897 | 903 1% | 921 3% | 609 -32% | 420 -53% |
| WiFi v1.3 | 736 | 865 18% | 694 -6% | 474 -36% | 419 -43% |
| Load | 215 | 261 21% | 191 -11% | 164 -24% | 202 -6% |
För
Emot
Läs den fullständiga versionen av den här recensionen på engelska här.
När vi tidigare recenserade Mi 8 Explorer Edition tyckte vi den var ett gyllene exempel på en bra enhet i prisskiktet straxt under 4.000 kronor och detta gäller även Mi 8. Den är inte lika enastående och saknar en del bling (som en genomskinlig baksidespanel eller en fingeravtrycksläsare som är inbyggd i skärmen) men den erbjuder fortfarande väletablerade mittenskiktskomponenter till ett rimligt pris. Till och med många månader efter att telefonen släppts officiellt i väst så är den mycket billigare än många av sina konkurrenter, inklusive den självutnämnda flaggskeppsdödaren OnePlus 6T.
Den kanske inte når upp till de högsta förväntningarna och den högsta standarden - dess GPS är inte i närheten tillräckligt precis, WiFi-modemet är för långsamt och energiförbrukningen är för hög. Men vid användning till vardags känns den som en lyxig smartphone med ett rejält hölje, en kraftfull SoC, en HDR-kapabel AMOLED-skärm och skapliga inmatningsenheter.
Tack vare ett superbt förhållande mellan pris och prestanda håller Xiaomi Mi 8 vad den lovar.
Det finns egentligen bara två problem. För det första, tillverkarens garanti (eller brist på sådan) och faktum att man som köpare är begränsad till en eventuell återförsäljargaranti. För det andra, faktum att även om operativsystemet och mjukvaran den här gången har översatts riktigt bra så är mängden bloatware som inte går att avinstallera häpnadsväckande. Plus att om du gräver djupare i inställningarna blir det snabbt... låt oss säga unikt.
Totalt sätt förtjänar Xiaomi Mi 8 fortfarande vårt fulla stöd, inte bara för hur mycket man får ut per krona. Vi kan inte vänta på att få prova Xiaomi Mi 9, som bör dyka upp på vår tröskel inom ett par veckor.
Xiaomi Mi 8
-
03/11/2019 v6(old)
Florian Schmitt
Pricecompare
