小米10 Pro智能手机评测:小米也加入了旗舰机队列
Competing Devices
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Drive | Size | Resolution | Best Price |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
88.2 % | 07/2020 | Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro SD 865, Adreno 650 | 208 g | 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash | 6.67" | 2340x1080 | |
88.9 % | 06/2023 | Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra Exynos 990, Mali-G77 MP11 | 219 g | 128 GB UFS 3.0 Flash | 6.90" | 3200x1440 | |
89.4 % | 04/2020 | Huawei P40 Pro Kirin 990 5G, Mali-G76 MP16 | 209 g | 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash | 6.58" | 2640x1200 | |
86.9 % | 10/2019 | OnePlus 7T Pro SD 855+, Adreno 640 | 206 g | 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash | 6.67" | 3120x1440 | |
86.1 % | 03/2020 | Oppo Find X2 Pro SD 865, Adreno 650 | 202 g | 512 GB UFS 3.0 Flash | 6.70" | 3168x1440 | |
85.8 % | 11/2019 | Google Pixel 4 XL SD 855, Adreno 640 | 193 g | 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 6.30" | 3040x1440 |
» Notebookcheck多媒体笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck游戏笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck低价办公/商务笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck高端办公/商务笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck工作站笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck亚笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck超级本产品Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck变形本产品Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck平板电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck智能手机Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck评测过最出色的笔记本电脑屏幕
» Notebookcheck售价500欧元以下笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck售价300欧元以下笔记本电脑Top 10排名
Networking | |
iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
Huawei P40 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra | |
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro | |
Oppo Find X2 Pro | |
OnePlus 7T Pro | |
Google Pixel 4 XL | |
iperf3 receive AX12 | |
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra | |
Huawei P40 Pro | |
Oppo Find X2 Pro | |
Google Pixel 4 XL | |
OnePlus 7T Pro |
![ColorChecker](fileadmin/_processed_/0/5/csm_Foto_XiaomiMi10Pro_ColorChecker_0bed0340d6.jpg)
![ColorChecker](fileadmin/_processed_/d/8/csm_Foto_XiaomiMi10Pro_ColorChecker_1Lux_1d52c804f0.jpg)
|
Brightness Distribution: 96 %
Center on Battery: 753 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 0.9 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.95
ΔE Greyscale 1.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
98.6% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.24
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro Super AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.7" | Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra Dynamic AMOLED 2X, 3200x1440, 6.9" | Huawei P40 Pro OLED, 2640x1200, 6.6" | OnePlus 7T Pro AMOLED, 3120x1440, 6.7" | Oppo Find X2 Pro AMOLED, 3168x1440, 6.7" | Google Pixel 4 XL P-OLED, 3040x1440, 6.3" | OnePlus 8 Pro AMOLED, 3168x1440, 6.8" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | -111% | -22% | -102% | -183% | -134% | 10% | |
Brightness middle | 753 | 734 -3% | 584 -22% | 606 -20% | 778 3% | 557 -26% | 796 6% |
Brightness | 762 | 748 -2% | 576 -24% | 611 -20% | 775 2% | 555 -27% | 779 2% |
Brightness Distribution | 96 | 95 -1% | 95 -1% | 95 -1% | 99 3% | 95 -1% | 94 -2% |
Black Level * | |||||||
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 0.9 | 3.2 -256% | 1.1 -22% | 3.46 -284% | 4.4 -389% | 3.9 -333% | 0.68 24% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 1.6 | 6.8 -325% | 2.3 -44% | 5.64 -253% | 8.7 -444% | 6.1 -281% | 1.55 3% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.5 | 2.7 -80% | 1.8 -20% | 2 -33% | 5.6 -273% | 3.5 -133% | 1.1 27% |
Gamma | 2.24 98% | 2.11 104% | 2.16 102% | 2.258 97% | 2.26 97% | 2.18 101% | 2.237 98% |
CCT | 6415 101% | 6299 103% | 6355 102% | 6779 96% | 7250 90% | 6127 106% | 6310 103% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 373.1 Hz | ≤ 99 % brightness setting | |
The display backlight flickers at 373.1 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 99 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 373.1 Hz is relatively high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. However, there are reports that some users are still sensitive to PWM at 500 Hz and above, so be aware. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17373 (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. » 8 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21.2 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
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 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 7 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (33.2 ms). |
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra | |
Huawei P40 Pro | |
OnePlus 7T Pro | |
Oppo Find X2 Pro | |
Google Pixel 4 XL | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (527301 - 631025, n=24) |
Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 351, n=164, last 2 years) | |
Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1) | |
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81) | |
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (45.2 - 77, n=20) | |
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chrome 78) | |
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra (Chrome 80) |
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1) | |
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chrome 78) | |
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81) | |
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (74.2 - 145.1, n=21) | |
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra (Chrome 80) | |
Google Pixel 4 XL (Chrome 80) |
Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 445, n=150, last 2 years) | |
Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1) | |
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80) | |
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81) | |
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chome 78) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (30.6 - 74.5, n=19) | |
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra (Chrome 80) |
WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
Average of class Smartphone (38 - 304, n=94, last 2 years) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (97 - 127, n=23) | |
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81) | |
Google Pixel 4 XL (Chrome 80) | |
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80) | |
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chrome 78) | |
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra (Chrome 80) | |
Huawei P40 Pro |
Octane V2 - Total Score | |
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 89112, n=207, last 2 years) | |
Google Pixel 4 XL (Chrome 80) | |
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chrome 78) | |
Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1) | |
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80) | |
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (14606 - 31224, n=23) | |
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra (Chrome 80) |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
Google Pixel 4 XL (Chrome 80) | |
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra (Chrome 80) | |
OnePlus 7T Pro (Chrome 78) | |
Oppo Find X2 Pro (Chrome 80) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 (1623 - 2911, n=24) | |
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro (Chrome 81) | |
Huawei P40 Pro (Huawei Browser 10.1) | |
Average of class Smartphone (388 - 28190, n=163, last 2 years) |
* ... smaller is better
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro | Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra | Huawei P40 Pro | OnePlus 7T Pro | Oppo Find X2 Pro | Google Pixel 4 XL | Average 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AndroBench 3-5 | -13% | -14% | -47% | -14% | -52% | -21% | 22% | |
Sequential Read 256KB | 1739 | 1632 -6% | 1775 2% | 1489 -14% | 1606 -8% | 871 -50% | 1547 ? -11% | 1717 ? -1% |
Sequential Write 256KB | 750 | 697 -7% | 395.7 -47% | 405 -46% | 729 -3% | 197.4 -74% | 575 ? -23% | 1322 ? 76% |
Random Read 4KB | 264.9 | 202.4 -24% | 228.1 -14% | 169 -36% | 202.6 -24% | 142.2 -46% | 210 ? -21% | 265 ? 0% |
Random Write 4KB | 258.5 | 221.4 -14% | 271.8 5% | 26 -90% | 205 -21% | 164.2 -36% | 188.5 ? -27% | 292 ? 13% |
PUBG Mobile
Asphalt 9 Legends
Dead Trigger 2
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 33.1 °C / 92 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 30.7 °C / 87 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.1 °C / 84 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 16.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (15% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 1% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 18% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 78% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3% 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 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 40% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Off / Standby | ![]() ![]() |
Idle | ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Load |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | |
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro 4500 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5000 mAh | Huawei P40 Pro 4200 mAh | OnePlus 7T Pro 4085 mAh | Oppo Find X2 Pro 4260 mAh | Google Pixel 4 XL 3700 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -35% | -9% | -121% | -118% | -14% | -62% | -31% | |
Idle Minimum * | 0.61 | 0.76 -25% | 0.92 -51% | 2.1 -244% | 1.47 -141% | 0.83 -36% | 1.133 ? -86% | 0.902 ? -48% |
Idle Average * | 1.19 | 1.91 -61% | 1.41 -18% | 3 -152% | 3.43 -188% | 1.24 -4% | 2.23 ? -87% | 1.448 ? -22% |
Idle Maximum * | 1.23 | 1.96 -59% | 1.47 -20% | 3.5 -185% | 3.52 -186% | 1.25 -2% | 2.45 ? -99% | 1.608 ? -31% |
Load Average * | 4.18 | 4.72 -13% | 3.35 20% | 5.3 -27% | 6.2 -48% | 4.98 -19% | 5.26 ? -26% | 6.1 ? -46% |
Load Maximum * | 8.53 | 10.15 -19% | 6.37 25% | 8.3 3% | 10.63 -25% | 9.09 -7% | 9.68 ? -13% | 9.04 ? -6% |
* ... smaller is better
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro 4500 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra 5000 mAh | Huawei P40 Pro 4200 mAh | OnePlus 7T Pro 4085 mAh | Oppo Find X2 Pro 4260 mAh | Google Pixel 4 XL 3700 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | -1% | -7% | 10% | -24% | -28% | |
Reader / Idle | 2133 | 1858 -13% | 1474 -31% | 2015 -6% | ||
H.264 | 973 | 1131 16% | 1137 17% | 957 -2% | ||
WiFi v1.3 | 865 | 720 -17% | 743 -14% | 912 5% | 654 -24% | 623 -28% |
Load | 198 | 221 12% | 198 0% | 283 43% |
Pros
Cons
Verdict - Competitive Bundle with Gaps on the Datasheet
小米手机不仅首次接近旗舰智能手机,而且也跻身其中-价格也体现了这一点。虽然价格已接近5000元,但它已不再是多年来的性价比产品,但如今,购买者将获得与其他制造商的旗舰智能手机相媲美的体验。出色的功能包括高质量的振动单元,很可能是您在智能手机上可以找到的最好的立体声扬声器,出色的做工和摄像头,尽管广角镜的质量仍达不到标准。特别是在三星Galaxy S20 Ultra和华为P40 Proo面前。但是,Mi 10 Pro的变焦功能(最高10倍变焦)弥补了这一点,与竞争对手的潜望镜相机相比,这些变焦功能更为出色。
同样,该屏幕是2020年旗舰智能手机的水准。 Mi 10 Pro的面板具有较高的刷新率,良好的色彩准确性和较高的亮度。同时,尽管对大多数人的日常使用不太可能有什么影响(参考一加8 Pro),但也有人质疑为何不全力堆料(120 Hz,1440p)。其他痛点是缺乏IP防水防尘认证,USB端口只有2.0速度。
是的,Mi系列不再便宜。但是,小米旗舰机的极高的建议零售价是合理的-至少相对于高端细分市场中的其他智能手机而言。
Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro
-
09/03/2022 v7 (old)
Marcus Herbrich