Cubot袖珍智能手机评论。极其方便的Android ，价格低廉的手机
潜在的竞争对手比较
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Drive | Size | Resolution | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 75.3 % v7 (old) | 07 / 2022 | Cubot Pocket T310, PowerVR GE8300 | 128 g | 64 GB eMMC Flash | 4.00" | 1080x540 | |
| 73.5 % v7 (old) | Cubot King Kong Mini 2 Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300 | 123 g | 32 GB eMMC Flash | 4.00" | 1080x540 | ||
| 86.1 % v7 (old) | 04 / 2022 | Apple iPhone SE 2022 A15, A15 GPU 5-Core | 144 g | 64 GB SSD | 4.70" | 1334x750 | |
| 77.6 % v7 (old) | 05 / 2022 | Realme C35 T7255, Mali-G57 MP1 | 189 g | 64 GB UFS 2.2 Flash | 6.60" | 2408x1080 |
外壳和功能。这款可能是设计师的手机实际上看起来很别致
只有少数厂商仍在生产真正方便的、屏幕相对较小的智能手机。其中包括Apple ，其iPhone minis和iPhone SEs，以及来自中国深圳的较不知名的制造商Cubot。虽然这些手机在过去几年里被称为 金刚迷你而Cubot Pocket则希望更时尚一些--就像最新时尚杂志旁边的生活配件。
Cubot对其非常紧凑的手机的外观进行了调整，以达到这一效果。它仍然有一个橡胶背，但现在有了别致的颜色，如青绿色配金色或黑色配红色金属框架。有趣的是，可见的螺丝，实际上在抗震加固的手机中更常见，也给人一种别致的工业气息。
Pocket再次明显小于和轻于一台 iPhone SE 2022但它也有相当的厚度：12.1毫米不再是我们所习惯的现代手机的厚度。这款手机的手感很好，但在背面施加压力时，会无声地收缩，这在一定程度上降低了质量印象。
Cubot的手机收费为169欧元，这比Cubot King Kong Mini 2的价格高得多。 金刚迷你2售价为119欧元。但你仍然得到64GB的存储空间和用于移动支付服务的NFC。
机上有一个用于内存扩展的microSD读卡器，在速度上与其他廉价智能手机不相上下。
| SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (7.7 - 77, n=78, last 2 years) | |
| Realme C35 (Angelbird V60) | |
| Cubot Pocket (Angelbird V60) | |
Cross Platform Disk Test (CPDT)
通信、软件和操作。仅限LTE和Wi-Fi 4
在Cubot Pocket中，LTE是可用的，但只有少数频率可以使用。尽管我们的评测样品是为欧洲市场设计的，可能在大多数时候都能在欧洲访问移动互联网，但在前往遥远的国家时，事情可能会变得很困难。
WiFi 4是Cubot Pocket可以处理的最快的WLAN标准。它实现了典型的传输速率，但我们觉得更高的数据接收速度是可能的。这款手机无法与iPhone SE等竞争，它们的性能和价格等级完全不同。
Android 手机上有11项功能，制造商在软件方面没有任何改变，所以你可以很容易地找到你的方式。按钮和键盘在小屏幕上感觉有点小，但由于准确的触摸屏，即使是大手，你通常也能找到正确的位置。没有指纹传感器用于解锁，但基于软件的人脸识别可以通过前置摄像头进行。
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Cubot King Kong Mini 2 | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Cubot King Kong Mini 2 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| Apple iPhone SE 2022 | |
| Cubot Pocket | |
| Realme C35 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Apple iPhone SE 2022 | |
| Realme C35 | |
| Cubot Pocket | |
照相机。仅用于快照，请
与之相比 金刚迷你2相比之下，Cubot Pocket提供了一个1600万像素的摄像头，这对于日常使用来说应该是足够的。然而，相机在正常的日光下似乎过于紧张，烧毁了明亮的区域或拍摄了相当暗的照片。细节在一定程度上是可识别的，但大多是浑浊的。
Cubot Pocket的相机在弱光下无法照亮非常暗的区域，图像的清晰度在这里也有很大的不足。与Cubot Pocket的照片相比，价格相近的 realme C35似乎至少高出一个档次。我们的测试设备只能提供基本的成像性能。
前置的500万像素摄像头也需要非常好的光线来拍摄像样的自拍。在我们的测试照片中，可以识别主体，但许多细节都丢失了，只有非常粗糙的结构在较暗的地方部分显示出来。
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 BlumeHauptkamera UmgebungHauptkamera Low Light
显示。在Cubot Pocket中明亮的IPS屏幕
分辨率相当低的IPS屏幕只提供了四分之一的像素的 realme C35但这在小屏幕上似乎没有问题，并导致了足够准确的显示。632cd/m²的最大亮度在平均水平上是不错的，而且屏幕的光照也相当均匀。
我们没有注意到任何PWM。作为IPS屏幕的常见现象，响应时间有点长。在我们用分光光度计和CalMAN软件进行的测量中，我们发现强烈的色调和棕色的显示非常不准确，而灰度水平则相当准确，最多只是有点太亮。
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 93 %
Center on Battery: 628 cd/m²
Contrast: 1102:1 (Black: 0.57 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.23 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 2.3 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
83.3% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.136
| Cubot Pocket IPS, 1080x540, 4" | Cubot King Kong Mini 2 IPS, 1080x540, 4" | Apple iPhone SE 2022 Retina HD, IPS, 1334x750, 4.7" | Realme C35 IPS, 2408x1080, 6.6" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Response Times | -18% | -28% | -28% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 34 ? | 46 ? -35% | 56 ? -65% | 50 ? -47% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 22 ? | 22 ? -0% | 20 ? 9% | 24 ? -9% |
| PWM Frequency | 354.6 ? | |||
| Screen | -31% | 28% | -25% | |
| Brightness middle | 628 | 624 -1% | 662 5% | 585 -7% |
| Brightness | 632 | 633 0% | 647 2% | 558 -12% |
| Brightness Distribution | 93 | 90 -3% | 92 -1% | 89 -4% |
| Black Level * | 0.57 | 0.87 -53% | 0.4 30% | 0.6 -5% |
| Contrast | 1102 | 717 -35% | 1655 50% | 975 -12% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.23 | 5.21 -23% | 1.44 66% | 4.4 -4% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 8.81 | 10.59 -20% | 4.74 46% | 8.77 -0% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.3 | 4.8 -109% | 1.7 26% | 5.9 -157% |
| Gamma | 2.136 103% | 2.585 85% | 2.179 101% | 2.228 99% |
| CCT | 6945 94% | 6953 93% | 6746 96% | 8001 81% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -25% /
-28% | 0% /
17% | -27% /
-26% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 22 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 10 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 12 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. » 44 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (21 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 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 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 42 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM not detected |  | ||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8743 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
性能、排放和电池寿命：便捷的Cubot Pocket持续时间长
正如你所期望的那样，在这个价格范围内，Cubot Pocket中的Unisoc Tiger T310是一款用于入门级设备的SoC。与联发科Helio A22相比，它在性能上有很大的飞跃。 联发科Helio A22中的联发科Helio A22相比，它的性能有了很大的飞跃。 金刚迷你2但它不能跟上 虎牌T616中的 realme C35.总的来说，即使对于这样一款廉价的手机，其性能也不太符合要求。
在日常使用中，系统运行平稳，但一旦事情变得更多，就会通过停顿或较长的等待时间来注意到薄弱的性能。eMMC闪存也很慢，而 Realme C35由于其UFS内存，在现实世界的存储性能方面更有说服力。
尽管性能不是很高，但在较长时间的负载下，系统在整个正面明显发热。然而，它并不像Cubot King Kong Mini 2那样热。 丘博特金刚迷你2.
在粉红噪声测试中，扬声器无法说服我们的软件系统。我们的特殊麦克风记录的声音值与最佳中值波动太大。在实践中，歌曲听起来相当平淡，没有低音。然而，声音还没有高到令人不快的程度。没有3.5毫米的音频输出端口--用户必须使用USB-C端口或蓝牙。
3000毫安时的电池可以通过附带的充电器充电，最大功率为10瓦。鉴于电池较小，这足以让Cubot Pocket在大约1.5小时内充满电。根据我们的WLAN测试，电池可持续使用16:34小时，因此在正常使用时，你只需每隔一天插一次电。
| Geekbench 5.5 | |
| Single-Core (sort by value) | |
| Cubot Pocket | |
| Cubot King Kong Mini 2 | |
| Apple iPhone SE 2022 | |
| Realme C35 | |
| Average UNISOC Tiger T310 () | |
| Average of class Smartphone (126 - 2437, n=172, last 2 years) | |
| Multi-Core (sort by value) | |
| Cubot Pocket | |
| Cubot King Kong Mini 2 | |
| Apple iPhone SE 2022 | |
| Realme C35 | |
| Average UNISOC Tiger T310 () | |
| Average of class Smartphone (473 - 6687, n=172, last 2 years) | |
| PCMark for Android - Work 3.0 (sort by value) | |
| Cubot Pocket | |
| Realme C35 | |
| Average UNISOC Tiger T310 () | |
| Average of class Smartphone (4609 - 24088, n=190, last 2 years) | |
| GFXBench | |
| on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| Cubot Pocket | |
| Cubot King Kong Mini 2 | |
| Apple iPhone SE 2022 | |
| Realme C35 | |
| Average UNISOC Tiger T310 () | |
| Average of class Smartphone (3.6 - 123, n=201, last 2 years) | |
| 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Cubot Pocket | |
| Cubot King Kong Mini 2 | |
| Apple iPhone SE 2022 | |
| Realme C35 | |
| Average UNISOC Tiger T310 () | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2.3 - 261, n=201, last 2 years) | |
| on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| Cubot Pocket | |
| Cubot King Kong Mini 2 | |
| Apple iPhone SE 2022 | |
| Realme C35 | |
| Average UNISOC Tiger T310 () | |
| Average of class Smartphone (0.85 - 119, n=201, last 2 years) | |
| 2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Cubot Pocket | |
| Cubot King Kong Mini 2 | |
| Apple iPhone SE 2022 | |
| Realme C35 | |
| Average UNISOC Tiger T310 () | |
| Average of class Smartphone (0.85 - 104, n=201, last 2 years) | |
| Cubot Pocket | Cubot King Kong Mini 2 | Cubot Kingkong Mini | Realme C35 | Realme C31 | Average 64 GB eMMC Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -32% | -32% | 215% | 57% | 9% | 608% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 261.6 | 275.5 5% | 246.9 -6% | 907.1 247% | 478.8 83% | 274 ? 5% | 1839 ? 603% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 186.9 | 137.8 -26% | 129.7 -31% | 271.1 45% | 131.9 -29% | 176.2 ? -6% | 1425 ? 662% |
| Random Read 4KB | 32.7 | 25.5 -22% | 26.9 -18% | 137.8 321% | 89 172% | 59.4 ? 82% | 277 ? 747% |
| Random Write 4KB | 59.5 | 9.4 -84% | 17 -71% | 206.4 247% | 61.5 3% | 32 ? -46% | 309 ? 419% |
温度
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42.8 °C / 109 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.2 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 39.3 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.1 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
扬声器
Cubot Pocket audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (16% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 8.5% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.5% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (28.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 72% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 23% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 85% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 13% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Apple iPhone SE 2020 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 6.3% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 8.4% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 44% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 49% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 63% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 31% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
电池寿命
| Battery Runtime - WiFi Websurfing | |
| Cubot King Kong Mini 2 | |
| Cubot Pocket | |
| Average of class Smartphone (476 - 3244, n=203, last 2 years) | |
| Realme C35 | |
| Apple iPhone SE 2022 | |
Pros
Cons
评语。无与伦比的紧凑尺寸，可以更便宜一些
Cubot Pocket是一个有大问题的小设备。相比之下，Cubot Pocket的价格大幅上涨。 金刚迷你2使得它的吸引力下降，因为在其价格范围内有更强大的手机。然而，如果你正在寻找一个真正方便的手机，目前几乎没有任何替代品--甚至是一个 iPhone SE也已经大得多了。
就质量而言，Cubot Pocket的摄像头只够拍快照，但只要你没有太高的期望，通过扬声器播放音乐还是很不错的。小巧的电池可以持续很长时间，明亮的屏幕也适合在光线充足的环境中使用。Cubot实际上已经把设计处理得很好，甚至散发着某种优雅的气息。
Cubot Pocket是如此方便，以至于它几乎没有任何对手。设计是令人愉悦的，但该相机只能用于非常简单的需求。
总而言之，你可能应该考虑多投资约200欧元在一个 iPhone SE 2020如果你正在寻找一个方便的手机 Apple iPhone SE 2020 Review - Small phone with a fast-beating heart这款手机功能更强大，并保证在几年内有软件支持。
价格和可用性
在测试时，Cubot Pocket在中欧有售：amazon.de制造商的价格为169.99欧元。另外，你也可以从制造商的商店aliexpress.com上订购。从欧洲发货，可以节省几欧元。
Cubot Pocket
- 07/10/2022 v7 (old)
Florian Schmitt
Price comparison
