Notebookcheck Logo

Test: Xiaomi Pocophone F1 Smartphone (Sammanfattning)

Prispressare – Xiaomi Pocophone F1 är en smartphone med flaggskeppshårdvara som har en bra kamera och lång batteritid men ändå kostar mindre än 3.500 kronor. I den här recensionen kan du få reda på huruvida Xiaomis koncept för en billig flaggskeppstelefon fungerar och vilka nedskärningar som har behövt göras för att hålla kostnaden nere.
Xiaomi Poco F1 (Poco F Serie)
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 8 x 2.8 GHz, Cortex-A75 / A55 (Kryo 385)
Minne
6 GB 
Skärm
6.18 tum 18.7:9, 2246 x 1080 pixlar 403 PPI, Kapacitiv, 10 punkters multitouch, IPS, glansig: ja
Hårddisk
64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 64 GB 
, 52 GB ledigt
Anslutningar
1 USB 2.0, Ljudanslutningar: 3.5 mm ljudanslutning, Kortläsare: microSD, 1 Fingeravtrycksläsare, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensorer: Accelerometer, Elektronisk kompass, G-sensor, Hallsensor, Närhetssensor, IR-ansiktsigenkänning, BeiDou
Nätverk
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM/GPRS/EDGE: 850, 900, 1,800, 1,900 MHz. UMTS/HSPA+: Band 1, 2, 5, 8. LTE Cat. 16: Band 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 38, 40, 41., Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Storlek
höjd x bredd x djup (i mm) 8.8 x 155.5 x 75.2
Batteri
4000 mAh Litiumpolymer
Operativsystem
Android 8.1 Oreo
Camera
Primary Camera: 12 MPix Dual-kamera: 12 MP – f/1.9, 1/2.55”, 1.4 μm; 5 MP – f/2.0, 1.12 μm
Secondary Camera: 20 MPix
Övrigt
Tangentbord: Virtuellt tangentbord, Laddare, USB Typ A till USB Typ C-kabel, SIM-verktyg, Silikonfodral, Snabbstartsguide, MIUI 9.5, 12 Månader Garanti, SAR-värden: Kropp – 1.582 W/kg; Huvud – 0.537 W/kg, fanless
Vikt
182 g
Pris
349 Kr
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Storleksjämförelse

158.4 mm 75.64 mm 9.55 mm 186 g158.1 mm 73.8 mm 8.5 mm 189 g155.5 mm 75.2 mm 8.8 mm 182 g155.7 mm 75.4 mm 7.75 mm 177 g155 mm 73.88 mm 7.65 mm 174 g153.2 mm 71.9 mm 7.9 mm 162 g149.6 mm 71.2 mm 7.7 mm 153 g148 mm 105 mm 1 mm 1.5 g
Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
Adreno 630, SD 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
647 MBit/s 0%
Xiaomi Poco F1
Adreno 630, SD 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
647 (598min - 665max) MBit/s
OnePlus 6
Adreno 630, SD 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
612 MBit/s -5%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
Mali-G72 MP18, Exynos 9810, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
519 MBit/s -20%
Honor 10
Mali-G72 MP12, Kirin 970, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
236 MBit/s -64%
iperf3 receive AX12
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
Adreno 630, SD 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
677 MBit/s 0%
Xiaomi Poco F1
Adreno 630, SD 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
675 (630min - 704max) MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
Mali-G72 MP18, Exynos 9810, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
652 MBit/s -3%
OnePlus 6
Adreno 630, SD 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
609 MBit/s -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (last 2 years)
376 MBit/s -44%
Honor 10
Mali-G72 MP12, Kirin 970, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
210 MBit/s -69%
04080120160200240280320360400440480520560600640680Tooltip
Xiaomi Poco F1; iperf3 receive AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø674 (630-704)
Xiaomi Poco F1; iperf3 transmit AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø647 (598-665)

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
Testkartan i detalj
483
cd/m²
468
cd/m²
477
cd/m²
502
cd/m²
489
cd/m²
483
cd/m²
498
cd/m²
483
cd/m²
494
cd/m²
Distribution av ljusstyrkan
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Max: 502 cd/m² (Nits) Medel: 486.3 cd/m² Minimum: 1.09 cd/m²
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 93 %
Mitt på batteriet: 489 cd/m²
Kontrast: 1438:1 (Svärta: 0.34 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.8 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.97
ΔE Greyscale 4.4 | 0.57-98 Ø5.2
99.5% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.22
Xiaomi Poco F1
IPS, 2246x1080, 6.2"
Honor 10
IPS, 2280x1080, 5.8"
OnePlus 6
Optic AMOLED, 2280x1080, 6.3"
Nokia 7 Plus
IPS, 2160x1080, 6"
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 6.2"
LG G7 ThinQ
IPS, 3120x1440, 6.1"
Screen
9%
15%
7%
27%
7%
Brightness middle
489
555
13%
430
-12%
458
-6%
565
16%
974
99%
Brightness
486
537
10%
437
-10%
463
-5%
571
17%
975
101%
Brightness Distribution
93
94
1%
87
-6%
92
-1%
96
3%
96
3%
Black Level *
0.34
0.39
-15%
0.22
35%
0.49
-44%
Contrast
1438
1423
-1%
2082
45%
1988
38%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
3.8
2.3
39%
2.3
39%
4
-5%
2.3
39%
5.4
-42%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
7.1
6
15%
4.6
35%
7.4
-4%
4.8
32%
13.1
-85%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
4.4
3.9
11%
2.4
45%
4.7
-7%
1.9
57%
5
-14%
Gamma
2.22 99%
2.19 100%
2.28 96%
2.19 100%
2.16 102%
2.31 95%
CCT
7213 90%
6212 105%
6160 106%
7425 88%
6332 103%
7480 87%

* ... 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 detected 2315 Hz ≤ 20 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 2315 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 20 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 2315 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17490 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) 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
24 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 9.2 ms rise
↘ 14.8 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. » 49 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21.3 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
44 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 21.6 ms rise
↘ 22.4 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 70 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (33.4 ms).
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
227026 Points
Honor 10
174272 Points -23%
OnePlus 6
230421 Points +1%
Nokia 7 Plus
117165 Points -48%
LG G7 ThinQ
223464 Points -2%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
222290 Points -2%
Huawei P20 Pro
179709 Points -21%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
226124 Points 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (162183 - 242953, n=23)
225534 Points -1%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
263165 Points
Honor 10
205297 Points -22%
OnePlus 6
266686 Points +1%
Nokia 7 Plus
141701 Points -46%
LG G7 ThinQ
256276 Points -3%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
250577 Points -5%
Huawei P20 Pro
207959 Points -21%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
246366 Points -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (246366 - 299878, n=27)
277434 Points +5%
PCMark for Android
Work performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
9664 Points
Honor 10
8530 Points -12%
OnePlus 6
9630 Points 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
6825 Points -29%
LG G7 ThinQ
9503 Points -2%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
5822 Points -40%
Huawei P20 Pro
8115 Points -16%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
9858 Points +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (7998 - 13211, n=26)
10123 Points +5%
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
8101 Points
Honor 10
7046 Points -13%
OnePlus 6
8282 Points +2%
Nokia 7 Plus
6077 Points -25%
LG G7 ThinQ
7717 Points -5%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
5319 Points -34%
Huawei P20 Pro
6982 Points -14%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
8178 Points +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (7360 - 9868, n=27)
8368 Points +3%
BaseMark OS II
Overall (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
3838 Points
Honor 10
3374 Points -12%
OnePlus 6
4308 Points +12%
Nokia 7 Plus
2369 Points -38%
LG G7 ThinQ
4257 Points +11%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
3302 Points -14%
Huawei P20 Pro
3271 Points -15%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
4288 Points +12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (3291 - 4693, n=26)
4111 Points +7%
Average of class Smartphone (411 - 11438, n=153, last 2 years)
5988 Points +56%
System (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
6506 Points
Honor 10
5882 Points -10%
OnePlus 6
8228 Points +26%
Nokia 7 Plus
4976 Points -24%
LG G7 ThinQ
8070 Points +24%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
6413 Points -1%
Huawei P20 Pro
5965 Points -8%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
8418 Points +29%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (4417 - 8613, n=26)
7644 Points +17%
Average of class Smartphone (2368 - 16475, n=153, last 2 years)
9902 Points +52%
Memory (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
3239 Points
Honor 10
3808 Points +18%
OnePlus 6
3799 Points +17%
Nokia 7 Plus
2503 Points -23%
LG G7 ThinQ
3744 Points +16%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
2625 Points -19%
Huawei P20 Pro
4050 Points +25%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
3704 Points +14%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2193 - 5296, n=26)
3649 Points +13%
Average of class Smartphone (962 - 12716, n=153, last 2 years)
6489 Points +100%
Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
7945 Points
Honor 10
4397 Points -45%
OnePlus 6
7949 Points 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
2298 Points -71%
LG G7 ThinQ
7906 Points 0%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
6370 Points -20%
Huawei P20 Pro
3725 Points -53%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
7743 Points -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (5846 - 8001, n=26)
7797 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone (764 - 58651, n=153, last 2 years)
15245 Points +92%
Web (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
1296 Points
Honor 10
1316 Points +2%
OnePlus 6
1386 Points +7%
Nokia 7 Plus
1101 Points -15%
LG G7 ThinQ
1374 Points +6%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
1109 Points -14%
Huawei P20 Pro
1273 Points -2%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
1400 Points +8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (1009 - 1613, n=26)
1344 Points +4%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 2145, n=153, last 2 years)
1532 Points +18%
Geekbench 4.4
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
2468 Points
Honor 10
1890 Points -23%
Nokia 7 Plus
1646 Points -33%
LG G7 ThinQ
2448 Points -1%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
3776 Points +53%
Huawei P20 Pro
1922 Points -22%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
2457 Points 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2272 - 2500, n=27)
2416 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone (844 - 9574, n=85, last 2 years)
5354 Points +117%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
9182 Points
Honor 10
6610 Points -28%
Nokia 7 Plus
5867 Points -36%
LG G7 ThinQ
9029 Points -2%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
8963 Points -2%
Huawei P20 Pro
6756 Points -26%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
8522 Points -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (7754 - 9231, n=27)
8705 Points -5%
Average of class Smartphone (2630 - 26990, n=85, last 2 years)
14602 Points +59%
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
14369 Points
Honor 10
8634 Points -40%
LG G7 ThinQ
13497 Points -6%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
6202 Points -57%
Huawei P20 Pro
8025 Points -44%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
14417 Points 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (10876 - 14489, n=25)
13578 Points -6%
Average of class Smartphone (2053 - 18432, n=64, last 2 years)
11438 Points -20%
3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
63159 Points
Honor 10
29111 Points -54%
OnePlus 6
62241 Points -1%
Nokia 7 Plus
26610 Points -58%
LG G7 ThinQ
56669 Points -10%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
39745 Points -37%
Huawei P20 Pro
30176 Points -52%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
64152 Points +2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (34855 - 65330, n=27)
61139 Points -3%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
82125 Points
Honor 10
32674 Points -60%
OnePlus 6
81269 Points -1%
Nokia 7 Plus
29333 Points -64%
LG G7 ThinQ
80534 Points -2%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
46610 Points -43%
Huawei P20 Pro
33472 Points -59%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
81502 Points -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (53794 - 85487, n=27)
80548 Points -2%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
34928 Points
Honor 10
21070 Points -40%
OnePlus 6
34191 Points -2%
Nokia 7 Plus
20085 Points -42%
LG G7 ThinQ
27817 Points -20%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
26226 Points -25%
Huawei P20 Pro
22441 Points -36%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
36762 Points +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (15614 - 37475, n=27)
33322 Points -5%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
5687 Points
Honor 10
3358 Points -41%
OnePlus 6
6304 Points +11%
Nokia 7 Plus
2035 Points -64%
LG G7 ThinQ
5799 Points +2%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
3895 Points -32%
Huawei P20 Pro
3223 Points -43%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
5492 Points -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (4363 - 6454, n=27)
5811 Points +2%
Average of class Smartphone (808 - 7285, n=34, last 2 years)
3929 Points -31%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
8261 Points
Honor 10
3573 Points -57%
OnePlus 6
8252 Points 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
1895 Points -77%
LG G7 ThinQ
7633 Points -8%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
4637 Points -44%
Huawei P20 Pro
3335 Points -60%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
8219 Points -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (5637 - 8312, n=27)
7763 Points -6%
Average of class Smartphone (730 - 9451, n=34, last 2 years)
4395 Points -47%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
2720 Points
Honor 10
2773 Points +2%
OnePlus 6
3452 Points +27%
Nokia 7 Plus
2734 Points +1%
LG G7 ThinQ
3150 Points +16%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
2496 Points -8%
Huawei P20 Pro
2885 Points +6%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
2541 Points -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2124 - 3668, n=27)
3115 Points +15%
Average of class Smartphone (1093 - 4525, n=34, last 2 years)
3148 Points +16%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
3972 Points
Honor 10
2891 Points -27%
OnePlus 6
4673 Points +18%
Nokia 7 Plus
1332 Points -66%
LG G7 ThinQ
4471 Points +13%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
3256 Points -18%
Huawei P20 Pro
2996 Points -25%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
4734 Points +19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (3197 - 4734, n=27)
4388 Points +10%
Average of class Smartphone (286 - 17553, n=92, last 2 years)
2944 Points -26%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
4746 Points
Honor 10
2993 Points -37%
OnePlus 6
5212 Points +10%
Nokia 7 Plus
1161 Points -76%
LG G7 ThinQ
5006 Points +5%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
3582 Points -25%
Huawei P20 Pro
3017 Points -36%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
5190 Points +9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (3488 - 5246, n=27)
4919 Points +4%
Average of class Smartphone (240 - 29890, n=92, last 2 years)
3071 Points -35%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
2528 Points
Honor 10
2582 Points +2%
OnePlus 6
3432 Points +36%
Nokia 7 Plus
2749 Points +9%
LG G7 ThinQ
3255 Points +29%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
2469 Points -2%
Huawei P20 Pro
2926 Points +16%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
3620 Points +43%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2118 - 3703, n=27)
3217 Points +27%
Average of class Smartphone (858 - 7180, n=92, last 2 years)
3233 Points +28%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
60 fps
Honor 10
59 fps -2%
OnePlus 6
60 fps 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
48 fps -20%
LG G7 ThinQ
60 fps 0%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
60 fps 0%
Huawei P20 Pro
60 fps 0%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
60 fps 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (58 - 89, n=27)
62.1 fps +4%
Average of class Smartphone (23 - 165, n=169, last 2 years)
85.1 fps +42%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
150 fps
Honor 10
124 fps -17%
OnePlus 6
150 fps 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
50 fps -67%
LG G7 ThinQ
144 fps -4%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
147 fps -2%
Huawei P20 Pro
121 fps -19%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
150 fps 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (98 - 152, n=28)
142.5 fps -5%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 791, n=169, last 2 years)
259 fps +73%
GFXBench 3.0
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
58 fps
Honor 10
50 fps -14%
OnePlus 6
58 fps 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
22 fps -62%
LG G7 ThinQ
41 fps -29%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
45 fps -22%
Huawei P20 Pro
54 fps -7%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
58 fps 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (33 - 75, n=27)
54.4 fps -6%
Average of class Smartphone (6.8 - 165, n=171, last 2 years)
73.3 fps +26%
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
71 fps
Honor 10
59 fps -17%
OnePlus 6
66 fps -7%
Nokia 7 Plus
23 fps -68%
LG G7 ThinQ
63 fps -11%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
74 fps +4%
Huawei P20 Pro
61 fps -14%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
71 fps 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (54 - 83, n=27)
73.1 fps +3%
Average of class Smartphone (11 - 363, n=171, last 2 years)
148.5 fps +109%
GFXBench 3.1
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
54 fps
Honor 10
34 fps -37%
OnePlus 6
54 fps 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
15 fps -72%
LG G7 ThinQ
26 fps -52%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
24 fps -56%
Huawei P20 Pro
36 fps -33%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
56 fps +4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (21 - 59, n=27)
45.3 fps -16%
Average of class Smartphone (3.7 - 158, n=171, last 2 years)
62.3 fps +15%
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
35 fps
Honor 10
39 fps +11%
OnePlus 6
56 fps +60%
Nokia 7 Plus
14 fps -60%
LG G7 ThinQ
51 fps +46%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
47 fps +34%
Huawei P20 Pro
39 fps +11%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
58 fps +66%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (32 - 61, n=28)
53.9 fps +54%
Average of class Smartphone (6.6 - 279, n=171, last 2 years)
104.7 fps +199%
GFXBench
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
33 fps
Honor 10
20 fps -39%
OnePlus 6
32 fps -3%
Nokia 7 Plus
9.1 fps -72%
LG G7 ThinQ
17 fps -48%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
14 fps -58%
Huawei P20 Pro
22 fps -33%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
37 fps +12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (13 - 37, n=27)
27.7 fps -16%
Average of class Smartphone (5 - 117, n=171, last 2 years)
44.7 fps +35%
1920x1080 Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Poco F1
35 fps
Honor 10
23 fps -34%
OnePlus 6
35 fps 0%
Nokia 7 Plus
8.3 fps -76%
LG G7 ThinQ
33 fps -6%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
28 fps -20%
Huawei P20 Pro
23 fps -34%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
35 fps 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (25 - 35, n=27)
33.4 fps -5%
Average of class Smartphone (3.1 - 166, n=170, last 2 years)
63.2 fps +81%
Lightmark - 1920x1080 1080p (sort by value)
Nokia 7 Plus
15.07 fps
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
35.83 fps
Huawei P20 Pro
25.93 fps
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value)
OnePlus 6
1169 Points
Nokia 7 Plus
349 Points
LG G7 ThinQ
1176 Points
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
1481 Points
Huawei P20 Pro
887 Points
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (1169 - 1201, n=5)
1179 Points
Average of class Smartphone (205 - 6114, n=59, last 2 years)
2343 Points

Legend

 
Xiaomi Poco F1 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Honor 10 HiSilicon Kirin 970, ARM Mali-G72 MP12, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
OnePlus 6 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Nokia 7 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, Qualcomm Adreno 512, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
LG G7 ThinQ Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus Samsung Exynos 9810, ARM Mali-G72 MP18, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Huawei P20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 970, ARM Mali-G72 MP12, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
88.1 Points +16%
OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66)
87.7 Points +15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (22.5 - 90.9, n=25)
80.3 Points +6%
Xiaomi Poco F1 (Chrome 68)
76 Points
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium (Chrome 68)
71.2 Points -6%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0)
69.6 Points -8%
Huawei P20 Pro (Chrome 65)
58.3 Points -23%
Honor 10 (Chrome 66)
56.5 Points -26%
Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60)
53.9 Points -29%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 89112, n=204, last 2 years)
34321 Points +136%
OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66)
17026 Points +17%
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
16720 Points +15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (3991 - 18275, n=28)
15153 Points +4%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0)
14760 Points +2%
Xiaomi Poco F1 (Chrome 68)
14514 Points
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium (Chrome 68)
13360 Points -8%
Huawei P20 Pro (Chrome 65)
11584 Points -20%
Honor 10 (Chrome 66)
10965 Points -24%
Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60)
10945 Points -25%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60)
3937 ms * -45%
Honor 10 (Chrome 66)
3899 ms * -44%
Huawei P20 Pro (Chrome 65)
3852 ms * -42%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium (Chrome 68)
3179 ms * -17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (2154 - 11204, n=28)
2905 ms * -7%
Xiaomi Poco F1 (Chrome 68)
2714 ms *
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
2484 ms * +8%
OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66)
2445 ms * +10%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0)
2060 ms * +24%
Average of class Smartphone (388 - 10968, n=160, last 2 years)
1546 ms * +43%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall
OnePlus 6 (Chrome 66)
252 Points +13%
LG G7 ThinQ (Chrome 66)
252 Points +13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 (96 - 291, n=23)
246 Points +10%
Xiaomi Poco F1 (Chrome 68)
223 Points
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium (Chrome 68)
211 Points -5%
Huawei P20 Pro (Chrome 65)
182 Points -18%
Honor 10 (Chrome 66)
182 Points -18%
Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60)
168 Points -25%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus (Samsung Browser 7.0)
164 Points -26%

* ... smaller is better

Xiaomi Poco F1Nokia 7 PlusLG G7 ThinQSamsung Galaxy S9 PlusSony Xperia XZ2 PremiumHonor 10OnePlus 6Average 64 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-12%
8%
17%
-7%
225%
23%
69%
613%
Sequential Read 256KB
705
283.1
-60%
695
-1%
819
16%
749
6%
828
17%
726
3%
Sequential Write 256KB
155.6
211.6
36%
176.4
13%
204.9
32%
171
10%
192.1
23%
201.4
29%
Random Read 4KB
101
54.7
-46%
110.5
9%
129.7
28%
136
35%
145.9
44%
137
36%
137.2 ?(78.2 - 192, n=52)
36%
Random Write 4KB
17.81
19.62
10%
23.26
31%
22.74
28%
21.75
22%
163
815%
21.8
22%
84.7 ?(8.77 - 208, n=52)
376%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
85.3 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
82.2
-4%
84.7 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-1%
79.2 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-7%
34.18 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-60%
68.6 ?(18 - 87.1, n=33)
-20%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
65.6 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
62.3
-5%
62.7 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-4%
67.2 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
2%
30.23 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-54%
52.2 ?(17.1 - 71.9, n=33)
-20%
PUBG Mobile
0510152025303540Tooltip
Xiaomi Poco F1; HD; 0.8.0: Ø39.6 (18-41)
Xiaomi Poco F1; Balanced; 0.8.0: Ø38.6 (11-41)
Arena of Valor
051015202530354045505560Tooltip
Xiaomi Poco F1; 1.24.1.2: Ø59.4 (34-60)
Hög belastning
 33.6 °C33.8 °C35.1 °C 
 33.8 °C33 °C34.7 °C 
 33.2 °C33 °C34.7 °C 
Max: 35.1 °C
Medel: 33.9 °C
30.5 °C32 °C33.9 °C
29.3 °C31.4 °C32.9 °C
29.6 °C31.9 °C32 °C
Max: 33.9 °C
Medel: 31.5 °C
Strömförsörjning (max.)  24.6 °C | Rumstemperatur 20.2 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 33.9 °C / 93 F, compared to the average of 32.7 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 35.1 °C / 95 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 28.6 °C / 83 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2035.430.12533.236.83123.730.14031.933.15039.738.86330.233.98025.221.510021.923.812522.326.416019.338.320016.646.925016.347.931516.552.44001858.750015.463.763015.663.180014.269.6100014.876.3125014.672.6160014.468.4200014.575.2250014.870.8315014.674.1400014.871.6500014.871.1630015.266.6800014.663.81000015.162.11250014.654.41600015.344.9SPL27.183.4N0.954median 15.1median 63.7Delta1.411.13033.936.137.63228.229.429.431.541.127.928.722.123.1222421.223.521.528.120.337.718.442.617.351.516.757.81763.116.163.615.869.115.872.715.37015.870.214.9731571.514.770.914.772.51571.315.1761572.815.472.91561.716.34827.683.6157.3median 15.8median 69.1212hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseXiaomi Poco F1Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Xiaomi Poco F1 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (10.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 49% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 42% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 68% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 25% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 34.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.5% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 49% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 42% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 68% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 25% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Strömförbrukning
Av/Standbydarklight 0.01 / 0.18 Watt
Låg belastningdarkmidlight 0.65 / 1.97 / 2.01 Watt
Hög belastning midlight 4.29 / 9.05 Watt
 color bar
Förklaring: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Currently we use the Metrahit Energy, a professional single phase power quality and energy measurement digital multimeter, for our measurements. Find out more about it here. All of our test methods can be found here.
Xiaomi Poco F1
4000 mAh
Nokia 7 Plus
3800 mAh
Honor 10
3400 mAh
OnePlus 6
3300 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
3500 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 845
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
3%
-22%
16%
26%
-8%
-5%
Idle Minimum *
0.65
0.65
-0%
1.12
-72%
0.6
8%
0.68
-5%
0.862 ?(0.42 - 1.8, n=26)
-33%
Idle Average *
1.97
1.76
11%
2.26
-15%
1
49%
0.95
52%
1.728 ?(0.67 - 2.9, n=26)
12%
Idle Maximum *
2.01
1.78
11%
2.3
-14%
1.6
20%
1.09
46%
Load Average *
4.29
4.47
-4%
5.14
-20%
4.3
-0%
4.58
-7%
4.87 ?(3.56 - 7.41, n=26)
-14%
Load Maximum *
9.05
9.13
-1%
7.89
13%
8.6
5%
5.16
43%

* ... smaller is better

Batteritid
Låg belastning (utan WLAN, min. ljusstyrka)
34tim 48min
WiFi Websurfing (Chrome 68)
13tim 28min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
15tim 36min
Hög belastning (maximal ljusstyrka)
3tim 40min
Xiaomi Poco F1
4000 mAh
Honor 10
3400 mAh
OnePlus 6
3300 mAh
Nokia 7 Plus
3800 mAh
LG G7 ThinQ
3000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus
3500 mAh
Huawei P20 Pro
4000 mAh
Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium
3540 mAh
Battery Runtime
-23%
-6%
-22%
-8%
-23%
4%
-26%
Reader / Idle
2088
1162
-44%
1806
-14%
1703
-18%
1662
-20%
1343
-36%
1727
-17%
1347
-35%
H.264
936
662
-29%
791
-15%
706
-25%
908
-3%
674
-28%
784
-16%
520
-44%
WiFi v1.3
808
663
-18%
762
-6%
672
-17%
591
-27%
521
-36%
744
-8%
547
-32%
Load
220
216
-2%
246
12%
158
-28%
260
18%
237
8%
345
57%
235
7%

För

+ snabb SoC
+ utökningsbart minne
+ 6 GB RAM
+ bra kameror
+ imponerande batteritid
+ stöd för aptX HD
+ skaplig teknik för ansiktsigenkänning
+ snabbt MIMO WiFi

Emot

- bara 12 månaders garanti
- medelmåttig samtalskvalitet
- inget stöd för NFC
- kraftig värmestrypning
- ej HD för Amazon eller Netflix
- reklam, reklam, reklam
Recension av Xiaomi Pocophone F1. Recensionsex från Cyberport.
Recension av Xiaomi Pocophone F1. Recensionsex från Cyberport.

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

Xiaomi har gett nytt liv åt OnePlus ursprungliga koncept som gick ut på att skapa en flaggskeppstelefon till budgetpris. Xiaomi Pocophone F1 presterade bra på i princip alla våra tester, särskilt när det kom till batteritid, kamerakvalitet och prestanda.

Vår testenhet använder sin Snapdragon 845 SoC väl, men Pocophone kan inte möta förväntningarna från den LiquidCool-teknik man gjort reklam för. Frustrerande nog bombarderade operativsystemet oss med reklam samtidigt som avsaknaden av HD-stöd för Amazon och Netflix kan vara en avgörande faktor för en del.

Xiaomi Pocophone F1 är mycket prisvärd, särskilt med tanke på dess kraftfulla SoC, imponerande batteritid och utmärkta kameror. För det här priset får du dock leva med några besparingar.

Pocophone kunde haft en bättre kalibrerad och mer ljusstark skärm, men Xiaomi behövde spara in någonstans. Skärmen kommer bara vara ett problem om enheten används i direkt solljus. Vi gillade dock kamerorna. Förvisso finns det bättre kameror där ute, men inte många till det här priset.

Vår testenhet hade även andra svagheter, nämligen dess samtalskvalitet och mottagning, som var sämre än hos konkurrenterna. Designen som i huvudsak består av plast är i vårt tycke enkel och stabil, men det är förstås subjektivt.

Xiaomi Pocophone F1 är med rätta en het kandidat för den som inte vill spendera mer än 3.500 kronor på en smartphone.

Xiaomi Poco F1 - 11/04/2019 v7 (old)
Daniel Schmidt

Design
80%
Tangentbord
67 / 75 → 89%
Mus
89%
Anslutningar
52 / 70 → 74%
Vikt
90%
Batteri
90%
Skärm
86%
Spelprestanda
47 / 64 → 73%
Programprestanda
69 / 86 → 80%
Temperatur
92%
Ljudnivå
100%
Audio
70 / 90 → 78%
Camera
55%
Medel
76%
82%
Smartphone - Vägt medel

Price comparison

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Bärbara datorer, laptops - tester och nyheter > Tester > Test: Xiaomi Pocophone F1 Smartphone (Sammanfattning)
Daniel Schmidt, 2018-10- 5 (Update: 2018-10- 9)