Fairphone 2 智能手机简短评测

Name: Fairphone 2
Brand: Fairphone

良心。 Fairphone 2宣传良好的劳动条件和可持续性而不是剥削及浪费。凭借着与众不同的模块化设计，它允许用户轻松更换组件。这台5英寸的Android设备在其他所有的方面采用了不同的方法来与对手竞争。

Manuel Masiero, ✓ Sven Kloevekorn (translated by Delta Zhang), Published 12/05/2016 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

Android Smartphone Touchscreen

Test device courtesy of Fairphone Deutschland

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Fairphone 2

Processor

Qualcomm Snapdragon 801 MSM8974AA 4 x 2.3 GHz, Krait 400

Graphics adapter

Qualcomm Adreno 330

Memory

2048 MB

, LPDDR3

Display

5.00 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 441 PPI, IPS, 大猩猩玻璃3代, 厚度: 0.7 mm, glossy: yes

Storage

32 GB eMMC Flash, 32 GB

, 24.7 GB free

Connections

1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5-mm 音频接口, Card Reader: micro-SD 卡 (SDHC, SDXC, UHS), Brightness Sensor, Sensors: 加速度计, 距离传感器, 陀螺仪, USB OTG, Miracast, App2SD

Networking

802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 4.0 LE, GSM quad-band (850, 900, 1800, 1.900 MHz), UMTS tri-band (900, 1900, 2100 MHz), LTE Cat. 4 (band 3/1800 MHz, band 7/2600 MHz, band 20/800 MHz), downloads/uploads at max. 150/50 Mb/s, dual-SIM, micro-SIM, SAR 0.426 W/kg (body) / 0.288 W/kg (head), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS

Size

height x width x depth (in mm): 11 x 143 x 73

Battery

9.2 Wh, 2420 mAh Lithium-Ion, removeable

Operating System

Android 5.1 Lollipop

Camera

Primary Camera: 8 MPix f/2.2, Omnivision OV8665, LED 闪光灯
Secondary Camera: 2 MPix f/2.8, Omnivision OV2685

Additional features

Speakers: 背面单扬声器, Keyboard: 虚拟键盘, Keyboard Light: yes, 后壳, 快速入门指南, Google apps, Amaze File Manager, Fairphone updater, 24 Months Warranty, fanless

Weight

172 g

Price

520 Euro

Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

see all specifications

Size Comparison

Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Samsung Galaxy S7 Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	335 MBit/s +32%
Fairphone 2 Adreno 330, 801 MSM8974AA, 32 GB eMMC Flash	254 MBit/s
Huawei P9 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash	185 MBit/s -27%
iperf3 receive AX12
Samsung Galaxy S7 Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	281 MBit/s +71%
Huawei P9 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash	279 MBit/s +70%
Fairphone 2 Adreno 330, 801 MSM8974AA, 32 GB eMMC Flash	164 MBit/s

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 1 Scene 2 Scene 3

click to load images

click to load images

click to load images


472 cd/m²	474 cd/m²	472 cd/m²
472 cd/m²	476 cd/m²	447 cd/m²
488 cd/m²	461 cd/m²	450 cd/m²

Distribution of brightness

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2

Maximum: 488 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 468 cd/m² Minimum: 7.71 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 92 %
Center on Battery: 476 cd/m²
Contrast: 1253:1 (Black: 0.38 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.5 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 4.2 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.54

	Fairphone 2 IPS, 1920x1080, 5"	Sony Xperia XA IPS, 1280x720, 5"	Huawei P9 IPS-NEO, JDI, 1920x1080, 5.2"	Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 Super AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.2"	Samsung Galaxy S7 SAMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.1"
Screen		-30%	9%	23%	23%
Brightness middle	476	518 9%	582 22%	378 -21%	350 -26%
Brightness	468	475 1%	563 20%	380 -19%	351 -25%
Brightness Distribution	92	81 -12%	91 -1%	91 -1%	98 7%
Black Level *	0.38	0.61 -61%	0.38 -0%
Contrast	1253	849 -32%	1532 22%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	4.5	6.8 -51%	4.4 2%	1.95 57%	2.04 55%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	9.2	11.4 -24%	7.4 20%	3.09 66%	3.25 65%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	4.2	7 -67%	4.8 -14%	1.86 56%	1.63 61%
Gamma	2.54 ^87%	2.35 ^94%	2.2 ^100%	2.13 ^103%	2.07 ^106%
CCT	7296 ^89%	8151 ^80%	6175 ^105%	6376 ^102%	6391 ^102%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)			77.78		86.86
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)			99.44		99.35

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ

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

266 Hz

≤ 100 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 266 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 100 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 266 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 8715 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

Display Response Times

ℹ

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
27 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 10 ms rise
27 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 17 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 64 % 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
51 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 26 ms rise
51 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 25 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. » 86 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms).

AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	37549 Points
Sony Xperia XA	48331 Points +29%
Huawei P9	95743 Points +155%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	41676 Points +11%
Samsung Galaxy S7	127902 Points +241%

Geekbench 4.0
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	798 Points
Huawei P9	1755 Points +120%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	1307 Points
Huawei P9	4904 Points +275%

3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	7796 Points
Sony Xperia XA	11156 Points +43%
Huawei P9	19854 Points +155%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	7903 Points +1%
Samsung Galaxy S7	29015 Points +272%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	10153 Points
Sony Xperia XA	10916 Points +8%
Huawei P9	21577 Points +113%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	7542 Points -26%
Samsung Galaxy S7	33348 Points +228%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	4301 Points
Sony Xperia XA	12138 Points +182%
Huawei P9	15517 Points +261%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	9495 Points +121%
Samsung Galaxy S7	19944 Points +364%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	Points
Sony Xperia XA	603 Points
Huawei P9	1237 Points
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	336 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	2715 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia XA	525 Points
Huawei P9	1080 Points
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	275 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	3018 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia XA	1259 Points
Huawei P9	2510 Points
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	1479 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	2010 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	Points
Sony Xperia XA	422 Points
Huawei P9	974 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	2170 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia XA	306 Points
Huawei P9	829 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	2216 Points
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia XA	1236 Points
Huawei P9	2503 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	2022 Points

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	21 fps
Sony Xperia XA	28 fps +33%
Huawei P9	43 fps +105%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	14 fps -33%
Samsung Galaxy S7	53 fps +152%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	23 fps
Sony Xperia XA	18 fps -22%
Huawei P9	40 fps +74%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	14 fps -39%
Samsung Galaxy S7	84 fps +265%

GFXBench 3.0
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	10 fps
Sony Xperia XA	15 fps +50%
Huawei P9	19 fps +90%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	3.8 fps -62%
Samsung Galaxy S7	27 fps +170%
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	8.8 fps
Sony Xperia XA	7.2 fps -18%
Huawei P9	18 fps +105%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	3.8 fps -57%
Samsung Galaxy S7	40 fps +355%

GFXBench 3.1
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Sony Xperia XA	11 fps
Huawei P9	11 fps
Samsung Galaxy S7	15 fps
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Sony Xperia XA	4.8 fps
Huawei P9	10 fps
Samsung Galaxy S7	28 fps

PCMark for Android - Work performance score (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	3036 Points
Sony Xperia XA	4685 Points +54%
Huawei P9	7058 Points +132%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	4008 Points +32%
Samsung Galaxy S7	4826 Points +59%

BaseMark OS II
Overall (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	317 Points
Sony Xperia XA	1043 Points +229%
Huawei P9	2025 Points +539%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	810 Points +156%
Samsung Galaxy S7	1987 Points +527%
System (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	1401 Points
Sony Xperia XA	2289 Points +63%
Huawei P9	3930 Points +181%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	2153 Points +54%
Samsung Galaxy S7	4217 Points +201%
Memory (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	433 Points
Sony Xperia XA	1076 Points +148%
Huawei P9	2627 Points +507%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	554 Points +28%
Samsung Galaxy S7	2244 Points +418%
Graphics (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	1768 Points
Sony Xperia XA	669 Points -62%
Huawei P9	1583 Points -10%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	488 Points -72%
Samsung Galaxy S7	1723 Points -3%
Web (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	9 Points
Sony Xperia XA	717 Points +7867%
Huawei P9	1029 Points +11333%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	741 Points +8133%
Samsung Galaxy S7	957 Points +10533%

Legend

Fairphone 2 Qualcomm Snapdragon 801 MSM8974AA, Qualcomm Adreno 330, 32 GB eMMC Flash

Sony Xperia XA Mediatek Helio P10 MT6755, ARM Mali-T860 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Huawei P9 HiSilicon Kirin 955, ARM Mali-T880 MP4, 32 GB eMMC Flash

Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 Samsung Exynos 7580 Octa, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Samsung Galaxy S7 Samsung Exynos 8890 Octa, ARM Mali-T880 MP12, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash

Octane V2 | Mozilla Kraken 1.1 | WebXPRT 2015 | JetStream 1.1

Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	4249 Points
Sony Xperia XA	4046 Points -5%
Huawei P9	11783 Points +177%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	3611 Points -15%
Samsung Galaxy S7	13161 Points +210%

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	7773 ms *
Sony Xperia XA	9610 ms * -24%
Huawei P9	2923 ms * +62%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	11887 ms * -53%
Samsung Galaxy S7	2562 ms * +67%

WebXPRT 2015 - Overall (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	65 Points
Sony Xperia XA	72 Points +11%
Huawei P9	128 Points +97%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	64 Points -2%
Samsung Galaxy S7	166 Points +155%

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value)
Fairphone 2	20.66 Points
Sony Xperia XA	27.5 Points +33%
Huawei P9	68.4 Points +231%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	22 Points +6%
Samsung Galaxy S7	74 Points +258%

* ... smaller is better

	Fairphone 2	Sony Xperia XA	Huawei P9	Samsung Galaxy A5 2016	Samsung Galaxy S7
AndroBench 3-5		66%	193%	50%	217%
Sequential Read 256KB	202.4	240.4 19%	281.3 39%	209.4 3%	483.8 139%
Sequential Write 256KB	104.1	68.6 -34%	72.2 -31%	60.4 -42%	145.7 40%
Random Read 4KB	10.77	22.05 105%	39 262%	22.9 113%	85.9 698%
Random Write 4KB	5.01	10.6 112%	47.45 847%	11.2 124%	16.01 220%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard	39.33	72.9 85%	55 40%		72.3 84%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard	24.08	50.7 111%	24.83 3%		53.6 123%

Max. Load

Idle


39.9 °C	39.2 °C	39.4 °C
40.3 °C	39.2 °C	39.6 °C
39.2 °C	39 °C	37.5 °C

Maximum: 40.3 °C
Average: 39.3 °C


34.9 °C	38.4 °C	43.1 °C
34.4 °C	35.6 °C	45.9 °C
33.7 °C	36 °C	43.8 °C

Maximum: 45.9 °C
Average: 38.4 °C

Room Temperature 21.2 °C | Voltcraft IR-260

(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 39.3 °C / 103 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 40.3 °C / 105 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 45.9 °C / 115 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 37.6 °C / 100 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.

Fairphone 2 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 35.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 38% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 55% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 57% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 36% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Sony Xperia XA audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.3% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 10.7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (29.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 74% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 22% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 86% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 12% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 33.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.7% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 42% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 51% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 61% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 33% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Power Consumption

Off / Standby	0.02 / 0.1 Watt
Idle	0.64 / 1.61 / 1.77 Watt
Load	5.02 / 6.98 Watt


Key: min: , med: , max: Metrahit Energy

	Fairphone 2 2420 mAh	Sony Xperia XA 2300 mAh	Huawei P9 3000 mAh	Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 2900 mAh	Samsung Galaxy S7 3000 mAh
Power Consumption		10%	-8%	4%	14%
Idle Minimum *	0.64	0.72 -13%	0.77 -20%	0.96 -50%	0.68 -6%
Idle Average *	1.61	1.5 7%	2.36 -47%	1.64 -2%	1.02 37%
Idle Maximum *	1.77	1.57 11%	2.37 -34%	1.71 3%	1.14 36%
Load Average *	5.02	3.48 31%	3.09 38%	2.98 41%	4.73 6%
Load Maximum *	6.98	6.04 13%	5.35 23%	5.08 27%	7.16 -3%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime

Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)		9h 55min
WiFi Websurfing		5h 21min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p		5h 42min
Load (maximum brightness)		2h 43min

	Fairphone 2 2420 mAh	Sony Xperia XA 2300 mAh	Huawei P9 3000 mAh	Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 2900 mAh	Samsung Galaxy S7 3000 mAh
Battery Runtime		20%	81%	169%	114%
Reader / Idle	595	775 30%	1514 154%	2323 290%	1810 204%
H.264	342	460 35%	568 66%	672 96%	892 161%
WiFi v1.3	321	353 10%	569 77%	626 95%	456 42%
Load	163	170 4%	206 26%	483 196%	242 48%

Pros

+ 良好的生产环境

+ 模块化设计

+ 双 SIM 卡及micro-SD卡

+ 高亮度全高清屏幕

+ 高系统速度

+ LTE

Cons

- 高价

- 仅有Android 5.1

- 笨重的外壳

- 无 NFC

- 屏幕闪烁

- 没有充电器

- 负载下降频

- 糟糕的电池

In review: Fairphone 2. Review sample courtesy of Fairphone Germany.

这台手机有着很多很高的标准：原材料的供应商意识到他们的各种责任而不单单是为了利益进行军阀式的统治。良好的工资和工人发言权取代了剥削。血汗工厂被良好的工作环境而取代。将废料进行回收而不是丢弃在垃圾厂。显然，这些良好的条件决定了这台手机不可能便宜，520欧元（约合554美金）的售价几乎是其他类似配置手机的两倍。与其售价不相符的是，买家不会得到一台高端智能手机，而会很明显地发现它是一台基于Android 5.1的中端手机。它除了够用的性能及合适的相机外，没有更多亮点。

Fairphone 2不符合所有的制造业惯例，具有模块化这一简单而独特的卖点。但是，因为其高昂的售价，它将在市场销售上经历一段艰难的时光。

然而，仅仅因为它的价格和够用的性能而降低我们对Fairphone 2的评分是有点。。。嗯-不太公平。与以“传统”方式生产的移动设备不同，事实上，它是没有任何竞争对手的，严格来说，它是无与伦比的。厂商的最终目的不是提供最廉价的设备。价格相比起对于社会及环境有着最高友好度的生产方式而言是次要的。它的价格仅仅是这种生产方式一种结果而已。这也成为了Fairphone 2最大的优势之一: 他促使买家去思考，他们在智能手机上真正应该花多少钱，在工人的权益和非盈利成为供应链的焦点情况下。答案是很明显的。

评测样机拥有一项杀手级功能，因此我们将总评提高一分。那就是模块化设计，它使得用户能够很轻松的自己修复手机，甚至可以自行更换硬件或升级。但很明显的是，业界普遍反对这一点，他们希望用户购买一台全新的昂贵的手机，而不仅仅是廉价的硬件升级。因为有着和Fairphone 2一致的理念，所以我们对它很满意。但做出购买决定可以更加简单，毕竟，在配置方面必须做出的一些妥协都是微不足道的。

注：本文是基于完整评测的缩减版本，阅读完整的英文评测，请点击这里。

Fairphone 2 - 11/24/2016 v5.1 ^(old)
Manuel Masiero

Chassis

66%

Keyboard

72 / 75 → 96%

Pointing Device

89%

Connectivity

41 / 60 → 69%

Weight

90%