三星 Galaxy A3 (2016) 智能手机简短评测
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 (Galaxy Series)
Processor
Samsung Exynos 7578 4 x 1.5 GHz, Cortex-A53
Graphics adapter
ARM Mali-T720 MP2
Memory
1536 MB
Display
4.70 inch 16:9, 1280 x 720 pixel, 电容式, Super AMOLED, glossy: yes
Storage
16 GB eMMC Flash, 16 GB
, 10.7 GB free
Weight
131 g, Power Supply: 57 g
Price
329 EUR
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 427 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 394.3 cd/m² Minimum: 2.13 cd/m²Brightness Distribution: 88 %
Center on Battery: 386 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.11 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 1.34 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.12
| Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 1280x720 px 4.71'' (AMOLED) | Samsung Galaxy A3 940x540 px px 4.5'' (AMOLED) | Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 1280x720 px 5.0'' (IPS) | OnePlus X 1920x1080 px 5.0'' (AMOLED) | Huawei P8 lite 1280x720 px 5.0'' (IPS) | Wiko Highway Pure 1280x720 px 4.8'' (AMOLED) | Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo 1920x1080 px 5.1'' (AMOLED) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | -47% | -84% | -203% | -143% | -203% | -59% | |
| Brightness middle | 386 | 434 12% | 418 8% | 312 -19% | 365 -5% | 298 -23% | 334 -13% |
| Brightness | 394 | 433 10% | 407 3% | 314 -20% | 353 -10% | 298 -24% | 341 -13% |
| Brightness Distribution | 88 | 96 9% | 95 8% | 91 3% | 93 6% | 96 9% | 91 3% |
| Black Level * | 0.49 | 0.42 | |||||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.11 | 2.98 -168% | 3.92 -253% | 6.28 -466% | 5.2 -368% | 6.81 -514% | 2.84 -156% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 3.35 | ||||||
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.34 | 2.68 -100% | 3.81 -184% | 8.24 -515% | 5.85 -337% | 7.53 -462% | 2.91 -117% |
| Gamma | 2.12 104% | 2.44 90% | 2.27 97% | 2.12 104% | 2.17 101% | 2.15 102% | 2.01 109% |
| CCT | 6441 101% | 6603 98% | 7361 88% | 8145 80% | 7252 90% | 8348 78% | 6432 101% |
| Contrast | 853 | 869 | |||||
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 70.86 | ||||||
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 91.25 |
* ... 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 | 240.4 Hz |  | |
The display backlight flickers at 240.4 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 240.4 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below. 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. | |||
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 9 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 4 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 5 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows fast response rates in our tests and should be suited for gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 21 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 3 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 4 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. » 16 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). | ||
AnTuTu v5 | Geekbench 3 | Linpack Android / IOS | BaseMark OS II | Smartbench 2012 | PCMark for Android | GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | GFXBench 3.0 | 3DMark
| AnTuTu v5 - Total Score | |
| OnePlus X | |
| Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
| Huawei P8 lite | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 | |
| Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 | |
| Wiko Highway Pure | |
| Geekbench 3 | |
| 32 Bit Multi-Core Score | |
| Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
| OnePlus X | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 | |
| Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 | |
| Wiko Highway Pure | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 | |
| 32 Bit Single-Core Score | |
| OnePlus X | |
| Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 | |
| Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 | |
| Wiko Highway Pure | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 | |
| 64 Bit Multi-Core Score | |
| Huawei P8 lite | |
| Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 | |
| 64 Bit Single-Core Score | |
| Huawei P8 lite | |
| Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 | |
| PCMark for Android - Work performance score | |
| OnePlus X | |
| Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 | |
| Huawei P8 lite | |
| Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 | |
| Wiko Highway Pure | |
| GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | |
| T-Rex Onscreen | |
| OnePlus X | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 | |
| Huawei P8 lite | |
| Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 | |
| Wiko Highway Pure | |
| Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 | |
| 1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen | |
| OnePlus X | |
| Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 | |
| Huawei P8 lite | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 | |
| Wiko Highway Pure | |
| Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 | |
| GFXBench 3.0 | |
| on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL | |
| OnePlus X | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
| Wiko Highway Pure | |
| Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 | |
| 1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen | |
| OnePlus X | |
| Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 | |
| Wiko Highway Pure | |
| Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| OnePlus X | |
| Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 | |
| Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 | |
| Wiko Highway Pure | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 | |
| Huawei P8 lite | |
| Sunspider - 1.0 Total Score | |
| Huawei P8 lite | |
| Wiko Highway Pure | |
| Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 | |
| OnePlus X | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Huawei P8 lite | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 | |
| Wiko Highway Pure | |
| Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
| OnePlus X | |
| WebXPRT 2015 - Overall | |
| OnePlus X | |
| Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 | |
| Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 | |
| Huawei P8 lite | |
| Wiko Highway Pure | |
| Google V8 Ver. 7 - Google V8 Ver. 7 Score | |
| OnePlus X | |
| Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 | |
| Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 | |
| Wiko Highway Pure | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 | |
| Huawei P8 lite | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
| OnePlus X | |
| Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 | |
| Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 | |
* ... smaller is better
| BaseMark OS II - Memory | |
| Huawei P8 lite | |
| OnePlus X | |
| Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 | |
| Wiko Highway Pure | |
| Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 | |
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 32.8 °C / 91 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 34.7 °C / 94 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 33 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.8 °C / 84 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 34.7 °C / 94 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 33 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.8 °C / 84 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Power Consumption
| Off / Standby |   0 / 0.15 Watt |
| Idle |  0.96 / 1.39 / 1.45 Watt |
| Load |
2.65 / 3.51 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Gossen Metrahit Energy | |
| Samsung Galaxy A3 2016 Mali-T720 MP2, 7578, 16 GB eMMC Flash | Samsung Galaxy A3 Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash | Motorola Moto G 3. Gen 2015 XT1541 Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 8 GB eMMC Flash | OnePlus X Adreno 330, 801 MSM8974AA, 16 GB eMMC Flash | Huawei P8 lite Mali-450 MP4, Kirin 620, 16 GB eMMC Flash | Wiko Highway Pure Adreno 306, 410 MSM8916, 16 GB eMMC Flash | Samsung Galaxy S5 Neo Mali-T720 MP2, 7580 Octa, 16 GB eMMC Flash | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -36% | -25% | -29% | -53% | -41% | -9% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1978 | 1080 -45% | 1364 -31% | 968 -51% | 715 -64% | 1235 -38% | 1615 -18% |
| H.264 | 863 | 602 -30% | 677 -22% | 514 -40% | 369 -57% | 465 -46% | 773 -10% |
| WiFi v1.3 | 628 | 526 -16% | 549 -13% | 351 -44% | 472 -25% | 546 -13% | |
| Load | 376 | 256 -32% | 264 -30% | 339 -10% | 194 -48% | 164 -56% | 402 7% |
| WiFi | 568 |
Pros
+ 非常优秀的机身品质
+ 出色的屏幕
+ 优秀的通话功能
+ 准确的触控屏幕
+ 低发热
+ micro-SD卡槽
+ 支持NFC和USB-OTG
+ 不错的扬声器
+ 很长的电池续航
Cons
- 相机的暗光表现
- 无提示LED灯
- 不支持5GHz无线网络
- 不支持Miracast或MHL
- 机身较滑
- 不可更换电池
三星的Galaxy A3更新带来了诸多优势。首先它坚固的高品质机身凭借弧形玻璃边缘和金属边框让我们心动不已。而这个设计的缺点则是不可更换的电池和很滑的后盖。
不过，它在技术参数上也有亮点。出色的屏幕，16GB的闪存可通过micro-SD卡扩展，而它的电池续航时间也让人十分满意。这都是许多用户所重视的智能手机特质。尽管它支持NFC，不过遗憾的是无线网络模组只支持2.4频段。三星的最新四核处理器没有刷新任何记录，不过它为Galaxy A3带来了适合日常使用的性能。与此形成对比的是，它搭配的相机模组让我们五味杂陈。尽管在光线好的时候它的成像锐利清晰，但只要光线稍弱它就会让用户失望。缓慢又不准确的自动对焦则时不时会让照片欠曝。
三星推出了一款高品质的中端智能手机，它的出色屏幕和超长电池续航让人无话可说。
和Galaxy A3价位相近，屏幕尺寸相当的其它设备几乎没有。如果可以接受更大的屏幕，用户可以考虑售价略高的Galaxy S5，它在我们的测试中得到了87%的更好分数。
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。
Samsung Galaxy A3 2016
- 02/29/2016 v5 (old)
Andreas Kilian
Smartphone - Weighted Average
Price comparison
