Notebookcheck Logo

小米红米9C智能手机评论。大量的内存?是的!大量的电源?不是!

大幅回升。

小米重新推出了价格低廉的红米9C,配备了128GB的存储空间和更多的内存,但这款在2020年发布的手机没有其他变化。在我们的评论中,我们将发现红米9C在2022年是否仍然值得购买。
ARM Android Smartphone
红米9C
Xiaomi Redmi 9C (Redmi 9 Series)
Processor
Mediatek Helio G35 8 x 2.3 GHz, Cortex-A53
Graphics adapter
Memory
4 GB 
Display
6.53 inch 20:9, 1600 x 720 pixel 269 PPI, capacitive touchscreen, IPS, glossy: yes, 60 Hz
Storage
128 GB eMMC Flash, 128 GB 
, 110 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5mm audio jack, Card Reader: microSD up to 512 GB, dedicated, 1 Fingerprint Reader, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, proximity, microUSB
Networking
802.11 b/g/n (b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/), Bluetooth 5.0, 2G (850/​900/​1800/​1900), 3G (B1/​B2/​B4/​B5/​B8), 4G (B1/​B2/​B3/​B4/​B5/​B7/​B8/​B20/​B28/​B38/​B40/​B41) , Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 9 x 164.9 x 77
Battery
5000 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Android 10
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix f/​2.2, phase comparison-AF, LED-flash, Videos @1080p/​30fps (Camera 1); 2.0MP, f/​2.4, macro lens (Camera 2); 2.0MP, f/​2.4, depth of field (Camera 3)
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix f/2.2, 1.12µm
Additional features
Speakers: mono speaker, Keyboard: virtual keyboard, charger, USB cable, SIM tool, 24 Months Warranty, SAR: 0.355W/​kg (head), 0.779W/​kg (body) , fanless
Weight
196 g
Price
190 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Possible competitors in comparison

rating
date
model
weight
drive
size
resolution
price from
73.8 %
v7 (old)
02 / 2022
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320
196 g128 GB eMMC Flash6.53"1600x720
74.9 %
v7 (old)
12 / 2021
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1
205 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.50"1600x720
78.4 %
v7 (old)
12 / 2021
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2
190 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.30"2340x1080
78.9 %
v7 (old)
01 / 2022
Motorola Moto G31
Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2
181 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.40"2400x1080

外壳和功能。大型手机,有大量内存

2021年中期,小米推出了红米9C--一款售价不到200欧元的手机,功能还算不错,但在当时类似价格的同事中并没有太突出。该制造商在2021年底发布了一个有更多存储空间的新版本,所以我们想再仔细看看这个设备。

红米9C仍然是一个相当大的智能手机,但其不到200克的重量是在限制范围内。外壳由简单的塑料制成,只是通过略带纹理的弧形线条图案来加强。可用的颜色是明亮的橙色、蓝色和微妙的深灰色。

2021年的机型现在包括128GB的大容量存储和4GB的内存,因此比许多同等价位的手机装备更好。红米9C以前的变种只向用户提供64GB/3GB或32GB/2GB的选择。然而,由于旧型号的价格已经下降,存储变体之间的价格差距相当大,特别是对于低于200欧元的手机。廉价的32GB机型仅售不到120欧元,而配备128GB存储空间的新红米9C则要190欧元。

最大的存储版本也有一个专用的SD读卡器,以领先的速度令人信服。然而,没有NFC,过时的microUSB端口也可能会让一些买家感到厌烦。

红米9C
红米9C
红米9C
红米9C

Size comparison

164.9 mm 77 mm 9 mm 196 g164 mm 75.8 mm 8.9 mm 205 g161.9 mm 73.9 mm 8.6 mm 181 g158.3 mm 75.3 mm 8.4 mm 190 g148 mm 105 mm 1 mm 1.5 g
SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
  (Angelbird V60)
47.8 MB/s +126%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7.7 - 77, n=79, last 2 years)
29.4 MB/s +39%
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
  (Angelbird V60)
21.15 MB/s
Motorola Moto G31
  (Angelbird V60)
17.7 MB/s -16%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro)
15.71 MB/s -26%

Cross Platform Disk Test (CPDT)

051015202530354045505560657075808590Tooltip
Xiaomi Redmi 9C PowerVR GE8320, Helio G35, 128 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø37 (26-47.6)
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø32.3 (23.2-38.8)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G85, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Toshiba Exceria Pro: Ø41.7 (32.2-56.9)
Motorola Moto G31 Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G85, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Write 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø35 (24.2-45.6)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C PowerVR GE8320, Helio G35, 128 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø73.4 (15.2-76.3)
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F Mali-G52 MP1, Exynos 850, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø50.2 (31.6-54.4)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G85, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Toshiba Exceria Pro: Ø84 (59.8-90.4)
Motorola Moto G31 Mali-G52 MP2, Helio G85, 64 GB eMMC Flash; SDCard Sequential Read 0.5 GB; Angelbird V60: Ø76.7 (37.3-82.8)

通信,软件和,操作。蹩脚的Wi-Fi

目前,红米9C的街头售价为190欧元,128GB存储空间的红米9C在同类产品中处于领先水平。 摩托罗拉Moto G31或内部的Redmi Note 8 2021但在网速方面却无法跟上它们。这两款对比设备都具有Wi-Fi 5,因此上网速度要快得多。对于Wi-Fi 4智能手机来说,红米9C实现的标准数据速率约为50Mbps。

MIUI 12是基于Android 10,所以不应该期待进一步的功能更新。至少安全补丁是2021年12月的,因此在测试时是相对最新的。

背面有一个物理指纹传感器,在明显的延迟后解锁智能手机。指纹识别是相当准确的,在我们的测试中,10个案例中有9个成功。触摸屏很容易使用,并为手指提供良好的滑动性能。

Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
347 (338min - 353max) MBit/s +627%
Motorola Moto G31
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
346 (334min - 352max) MBit/s +625%
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
802.11 b/g/n
47.7 (14min - 69max) MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
802.11 b/g/n
42.9 (21min - 65max) MBit/s -10%
iperf3 receive AX12
Motorola Moto G31
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
353 (261min - 359max) MBit/s +886%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
320 (290min - 330max) MBit/s +794%
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
802.11 b/g/n
50.4 (41min - 57max) MBit/s +41%
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
802.11 b/g/n
35.8 (19min - 52max) MBit/s
05101520253035404550556065Tooltip
Xiaomi Redmi 9C; iperf3 receive AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø35.4 (19-52)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C; iperf3 transmit AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø47.7 (14-69)

照相机 - 对于这个价格来说,图像质量不错

前置摄像头的录制
前置摄像头的录制

除了1300万像素的主摄像头外,背面还有另外两个,但分辨率很低的摄像头--一个微距摄像头和一个支持人像模糊效果的摄像头。

主摄像头拍摄的照片动态范围较低,但清晰度还不错。当然,在细节表现方面,它不能跟上真正好的手机摄像头,但就其价格范围而言,它做得相当不错。然而,在实验室里光线很暗的情况下,照片中看不到任何细节。

视频可以以最高1080p和30帧的速度录制,而自动对焦偶尔会反应得有点慢。否则,质量是可以接受的。

前置摄像头只有500万像素,在光线良好的情况下可以进行体面的自拍。然而,这里的动态范围也不是很大,所以黑暗区域很快就变成了平坦的黑色。这在我们的测试图片中的头发上可以很好地看到。

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.

Hauptkamera PflanzeHauptkamera UmgebungHauptkamera Low Light
orginal image
click to load images
ColorChecker
8.7 ∆E
9.9 ∆E
12 ∆E
10.5 ∆E
12.3 ∆E
9.6 ∆E
11.9 ∆E
9.2 ∆E
8.9 ∆E
4.7 ∆E
10.1 ∆E
12 ∆E
5.6 ∆E
10.3 ∆E
7.9 ∆E
6 ∆E
9.4 ∆E
12.2 ∆E
4.6 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
7.7 ∆E
4.8 ∆E
2.4 ∆E
6.7 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Redmi 9C: 8.44 ∆E min: 2.37 - max: 12.29 ∆E
ColorChecker
30 ∆E
55.5 ∆E
39.8 ∆E
35.3 ∆E
46.1 ∆E
62.4 ∆E
53.7 ∆E
36.1 ∆E
44.2 ∆E
29 ∆E
65.1 ∆E
64.1 ∆E
31.5 ∆E
47.7 ∆E
37.3 ∆E
77.1 ∆E
44.6 ∆E
42 ∆E
88.6 ∆E
70.6 ∆E
52.5 ∆E
36.9 ∆E
23.8 ∆E
13.3 ∆E
ColorChecker Xiaomi Redmi 9C: 46.97 ∆E min: 13.35 - max: 88.65 ∆E

显示。分辨率低,亮度好

子像素记录
子像素记录

像红米9C这样的720p显示屏,在200欧元以下没有什么不寻常的。虽然如此,像 Redmi Note 8 2021摩托罗拉Moto G31显示,1080p屏幕也是可能的,Moto甚至有一个高质量的OLED屏幕。

在亮度方面,我们评测样本中的面板可以跟上这个价格范围内的其他智能手机。黑值也相当高,这对对比度有负面影响,从而影响了颜色的亮度。

色彩再现相当真实,但无法与Moto G31的OLED竞争。 Moto G31.

401
cd/m²
438
cd/m²
386
cd/m²
397
cd/m²
467
cd/m²
397
cd/m²
396
cd/m²
463
cd/m²
405
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 467 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 416.7 cd/m² Minimum: 3.88 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 83 %
Center on Battery: 467 cd/m²
Contrast: 881:1 (Black: 0.53 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.14 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 6 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
92.9% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.291
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
IPS, 1600x720, 6.5"
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
IPS LCD, 1600x720, 6.5"
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
IPS LCD, 2340x1080, 6.3"
Motorola Moto G31
OLED, 2400x1080, 6.4"
Response Times
-32%
-22%
24%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
60 ?(27, 33)
58 ?(31, 27)
3%
52 ?(27, 25)
13%
6 ?(3, 3)
90%
Response Time Black / White *
34 ?(17, 17)
34 ?(17, 17)
-0%
28 ?(13, 15)
18%
6 ?(3, 3)
82%
PWM Frequency
17120
178.6 ?(7)
-99%
352.1 ?(5)
-98%
223.2
-99%
Screen
14%
31%
28%
Brightness middle
467
446
-4%
496
6%
423
-9%
Brightness
417
423
1%
491
18%
425
2%
Brightness Distribution
83
88
6%
91
10%
94
13%
Black Level *
0.53
0.29
45%
0.19
64%
Contrast
881
1538
75%
2611
196%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
4.14
4.94
-19%
5.5
-33%
1.58
62%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
8.49
8.81
-4%
8.88
-5%
4.68
45%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
6
5.1
15%
6.6
-10%
2.7
55%
Gamma
2.291 96%
2.145 103%
2.36 93%
2.219 99%
CCT
7536 86%
7890 82%
8432 77%
6674 97%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-9% / 2%
5% / 16%
26% / 27%

* ... smaller is better

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
34 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 17 ms rise
↘ 17 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 90 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
60 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 27 ms rise
↘ 33 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 95 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms).

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 17120 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 17120 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 17120 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 8705 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

PWM亮度为0
PWM亮度为0
PWM 亮度50%
PWM 亮度50%
CalMAN灰度
CalMAN灰度
CalMAN颜色精度
CalMAN颜色精度
CalMAN色彩空间
CalMAN色彩空间
CalMAN饱和度
CalMAN饱和度

性能,排放,和电池寿命。红米9C动力不足

联发科Helio G35负责红米9C的性能。8个核心可以以2.3GHz的最高时钟工作。该SoC无法跟上对比设备的步伐。性能差异是巨大的,在某些情况下超过100%。

在我们的测试中也可以看出,你必须用很少的电量来做事情--只有在运行一个比较复杂的应用程序时,屏幕才能旋转,而且有时调用音量控制也会延迟。

eMMC闪存很大,但速度不快。然而,对比设备也没有提供更快的存储模块。

即使在较长的负载下也不会出现过度发热;温度始终保持在40℃以下。

底部边缘的小型单声道扬声器不会变得很响,听起来相当平庸。如果你想要更好的声音,你可以通过3.5毫米插孔或蓝牙连接耳机或扬声器。

5,000毫安时的电池提供了超过15小时的体面运行时间,但由于最大充电功率只有10瓦,所以需要很长的时间来充电。

Geekbench 5.5
Single-Core (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
149 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
178 Points +19%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
355 Points +138%
Motorola Moto G31
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
353 Points +137%
Average Mediatek Helio G35
  (149 - 178, n=5)
167.2 Points +12%
Average of class Smartphone
  (126 - 2437, n=176, last 2 years)
1037 Points +596%
Multi-Core (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
538 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
1087 Points +102%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
1336 Points +148%
Motorola Moto G31
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1295 Points +141%
Average Mediatek Helio G35
  (538 - 965, n=5)
780 Points +45%
Average of class Smartphone
  (473 - 8816, n=176, last 2 years)
3464 Points +544%
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
5208 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
5739 Points +10%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
7090 Points +36%
Motorola Moto G31
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
6596 Points +27%
Average Mediatek Helio G35
  (5208 - 5581, n=5)
5333 Points +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4609 - 27169, n=197, last 2 years)
13179 Points +153%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
843 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
1273 Points +51%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
1897 Points +125%
Motorola Moto G31
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1785 Points +112%
Average Mediatek Helio G35
  (599 - 928, n=5)
831 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (883 - 23024, n=73, last 2 years)
11109 Points +1218%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
799 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
1142 Points +43%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
1765 Points +121%
Motorola Moto G31
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1633 Points +104%
Average Mediatek Helio G35
  (541 - 853, n=5)
770 Points -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (840 - 45492, n=73, last 2 years)
19708 Points +2367%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
1043 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
2032 Points +95%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
2778 Points +166%
Motorola Moto G31
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2644 Points +153%
Average Mediatek Helio G35
  (954 - 1343, n=5)
1156 Points +11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1075 - 8749, n=73, last 2 years)
5001 Points +379%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
445 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
863 Points +94%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
1463 Points +229%
Motorola Moto G31
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1408 Points +216%
Average Mediatek Helio G35
  (341 - 486, n=5)
432 Points -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (286 - 17553, n=70, last 2 years)
3006 Points +576%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
377 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
738 Points +96%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
1264 Points +235%
Motorola Moto G31
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1246 Points +231%
Average Mediatek Helio G35
  (289 - 412, n=5)
366 Points -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (240 - 29890, n=70, last 2 years)
3166 Points +740%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
1194 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
2031 Points +70%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
2654 Points +122%
Motorola Moto G31
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2578 Points +116%
Average Mediatek Helio G35
  (933 - 1301, n=5)
1170 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (858 - 7180, n=70, last 2 years)
3260 Points +173%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
491 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
867 Points +77%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
1453 Points +196%
Motorola Moto G31
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1430 Points +191%
Average Mediatek Helio G35
  (373 - 539, n=5)
484 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (317 - 22303, n=162, last 2 years)
8158 Points +1562%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
425 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
736 Points +73%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
1253 Points +195%
Motorola Moto G31
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
1267 Points +198%
Average Mediatek Helio G35
  (318 - 462, n=5)
419 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (267 - 40163, n=162, last 2 years)
12271 Points +2787%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
1073 Points
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
2109 Points +97%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
2811 Points +162%
Motorola Moto G31
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
2603 Points +143%
Average Mediatek Helio G35
  (839 - 1304, n=5)
1086 Points +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (877 - 10259, n=162, last 2 years)
4723 Points +340%
GFXBench
on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
7.5 fps
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
11 fps +47%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
8.5 fps +13%
Motorola Moto G31
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
8.4 fps +12%
Average Mediatek Helio G35
  (7.4 - 8.1, n=5)
7.68 fps +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3.6 - 247, n=207, last 2 years)
51.7 fps +589%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
4.1 fps
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
6.2 fps +51%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
9.7 fps +137%
Motorola Moto G31
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
9.6 fps +134%
Average Mediatek Helio G35
  (4.1 - 4.2, n=5)
4.14 fps +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.3 - 321, n=207, last 2 years)
84.6 fps +1963%
on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
4.8 fps
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
7 fps +46%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
5.5 fps +15%
Motorola Moto G31
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
5.4 fps +13%
Average Mediatek Helio G35
  (4.7 - 5, n=5)
4.82 fps 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.85 - 144, n=207, last 2 years)
38.9 fps +710%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C
Mediatek Helio G35, PowerVR GE8320, 4096
1.5 fps
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
Samsung Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1, 4096
2.2 fps +47%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4076
3.5 fps +133%
Motorola Moto G31
Mediatek Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2, 4096
3.5 fps +133%
Average Mediatek Helio G35
  (1.4 - 1.5, n=5)
1.48 fps -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.85 - 129, n=207, last 2 years)
34 fps +2167%
Xiaomi Redmi 9CSamsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127FXiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021Motorola Moto G31Average 128 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
3%
39%
64%
23%
578%
Sequential Read 256KB
263.1
302.3
15%
309.4
18%
309.8
18%
Sequential Write 256KB
208.4
74.5
-64%
159.7
-23%
221.5
6%
194.6 ?(72.3 - 314, n=77)
-7%
Random Read 4KB
54.5
77.8
43%
73.6
35%
84
54%
Random Write 4KB
39.7
47.21
19%
88.9
124%
109.8
177%

温度

Max. Load
 39.3 °C34.5 °C32.7 °C 
 38.6 °C34.5 °C32.8 °C 
 37.7 °C34.5 °C32.9 °C 
Maximum: 39.3 °C
Average: 35.3 °C
31.8 °C34.5 °C38.6 °C
32.4 °C34.1 °C39.2 °C
31.8 °C34.5 °C38 °C
Maximum: 39.2 °C
Average: 35 °C
Power Supply (max.)  42.3 °C | Room Temperature 21 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 35.3 °C / 96 F, compared to the average of 32.8 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 39.3 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 39.2 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.7 °C / 82 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.


热力图前线
热力图前线
热图背面
热图背面

扬声器

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2035.737.82539.237.63130.934.54033.730.6503733.26330.230.98021.419.310019.919.812514.614.716012.521.52009.929.62509.338.63158.246.34008.551.75009.356.16309.857.680014.561.2100011.464.7125010.365.416009.36520009.266.6250010.664.9315011.765.3400011.466.4500012.168630012.666.5800012.868.81000013.568.8125001461.51600014.454.8SPL23.877.7N0.539.6median 11.4median 61.5Delta2.212.438.945.244.744.3343636.839.642.644.737.335.426.227.528.327.822.431.318.939.51642.314.547.213.2561361.616.565.819.568.719.670.517.470.715.375.115.374.915.775.516.575.617.976.120.869.62272.720.980.521.777.722.874.22268.922.556.331.586.91.468.6median 18.9median 69.639.9hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseXiaomi Redmi 9CXiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Xiaomi Redmi 9C audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (77.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 33.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (2.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (25.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 59% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 34% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 75% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 20% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 40% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 59% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 34% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

电池寿命

Xiaomi Redmi 9C
5000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A12 Exynos SM-A127F
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 2021
4000 mAh
Motorola Moto G31
5000 mAh
Average of class Smartphone
 
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing
905
879
-3%
748
-17%
1032
14%
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing
15h 05min

Pros

+ 大量的内存
+ 不错的主摄像头
+ 良好的屏幕亮度
+ 运行时间长
+ 几乎没有发热

Cons

- 没有NFC
- 过时的微型USB接口
- 蹩脚的处理器
- 充电速度慢

结论 - 太贵了,即使有大内存也不行

在审查中。小米红米9C。测试设备由:
在审查中。小米红米9C。测试设备由:
数码港.com

新的存储变量无疑使小米红米9C更具时代感。特别是内存增加到4GB在这里是个福音。它可以防止你因为工作内存不足而根本无法运行更复杂的应用程序。另外,对于200欧元以下的智能手机来说,128GB的大容量存储是一个很好的功能。

然而,较新的红米9C只是表明它的其他部件在推出时已经有18个月的历史。特别是处理器在速度上跟不上同价位的手机,Wi-Fi 4在200欧元(约200美元)以下的设备中也变得越来越少。红米9C没有NFC,在这个价格范围内肯定有更高的分辨率屏幕。

小米红米9C现在提供了大量的存储空间,但由于处理器速度较慢,以制造商的价格来说简直太贵了。

小米红米9C看起来还没有落伍到无可救药的地步,但它还是有点太贵了,而且速度太慢,在快速发展的智能手机领域无法成为真正意义上的性价比之作。

红米9C仍然可以推荐给那些希望以尽可能低的价格在智能手机中获得最大存储空间,并且只使用简单应用程序的人。如果价格在未来几个月内大幅下降,该设备可能会变得更加有趣。

Redmi Note 8 2021来自同一制造商,提供更多的性能,更快的互联网,以及更高分辨率的屏幕。该摩托车G31甚至有一个OLED屏幕。

价格和可用性

在测试时,拥有128GB数据存储的红米9C的售价略低于190欧元(约190美元)。你应该比较不同颜色变体的价格,在那里你有时可以节省10%以上。我们的贷款人Cyberport提供的灰色变体特别便宜,而且目前在亚马逊上也有售。.

Xiaomi Redmi 9C - 01/27/2022 v7 (old)
Florian Schmitt

Chassis
79%
Keyboard
65 / 75 → 87%
Pointing Device
92%
Connectivity
35 / 70 → 50%
Weight
88%
Battery
91%
Display
83%
Games Performance
5 / 64 → 8%
Application Performance
40 / 86 → 47%
Temperature
91%
Noise
100%
Audio
50 / 90 → 56%
Camera
53%
Average
67%
74%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Price comparison

Please share our article, every link counts!
Mail Logo
> Notebookcheck中文版(NBC中国) > 评测 > 小米红米9C智能手机评论。大量的内存?是的!大量的电源?不是!
Florian Schmitt, 2022-02- 1 (Update: 2022-02- 1)