三星Galaxy A7（2018款）智能手机评测
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 93 %
Center on Battery: 570 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.5 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 1.2 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
98.7% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.07
| Samsung Galaxy A7 2018 Super AMOLED, 2220x1080, 6" | Samsung Galaxy A8 2018 Super AMOLED, 2220x1080, 5.6" | Nokia 7 Plus IPS, 2160x1080, 6" | Xiaomi Mi 6X LCD IPS, 2160x1080, 6" | Xiaomi Poco F1 IPS, 2246x1080, 6.2" | Honor 8X LCD IPS, 2340x1080, 6.5" | BQ Aquaris X2 IPS LCD, 2160x1080, 5.7" | Sony Xperia XA2 IPS, 1920x1080, 5.2" | Samsung Galaxy S8 Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 5.8" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | -84% | -101% | -173% | -91% | -191% | -124% | -170% | -48% | |
| Brightness middle | 570 | 541 -5% | 458 -20% | 459 -19% | 489 -14% | 484 -15% | 631 11% | 513 -10% | 566 -1% |
| Brightness | 565 | 538 -5% | 463 -18% | 441 -22% | 486 -14% | 469 -17% | 622 10% | 506 -10% | 564 0% |
| Brightness Distribution | 93 | 96 3% | 92 -1% | 91 -2% | 93 0% | 93 0% | 96 3% | 93 0% | 94 1% |
| Black Level * | 0.22 | 0.47 | 0.34 | 0.55 | 0.61 | 0.42 | |||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.5 | 5.8 -287% | 4 -167% | 5.8 -287% | 3.8 -153% | 7.3 -387% | 5.5 -267% | 5 -233% | 2.7 -80% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 3.6 | 7.4 -106% | 10.7 -197% | 7.1 -97% | 11.1 -208% | 8.5 -136% | 11.4 -217% | 5.4 -50% | |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.2 | 2.7 -125% | 4.7 -292% | 7.3 -508% | 4.4 -267% | 7.4 -517% | 5.6 -367% | 7.8 -550% | 3.1 -158% |
| Gamma | 2.07 106% | 2.07 106% | 2.19 100% | 2.28 96% | 2.22 99% | 2.16 102% | 2.38 92% | 2.2 100% | 2.15 102% |
| CCT | 6504 100% | 6570 99% | 7425 88% | 7984 81% | 7213 90% | 8534 76% | 7531 86% | 7964 82% | 6335 103% |
| Contrast | 2082 | 977 | 1438 | 880 | 1034 | 1221 | |||
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 81.57 | ||||||||
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 99.87 |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 240.4 Hz | ≤ 99 % brightness setting |  |
The display backlight flickers at 240.4 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 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
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 2 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 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. » 12 % 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 | ||
| 4.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 2.8 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 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. » 13 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). | ||
| GFXBench 3.1 | |
| on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A8 2018 | |
| Nokia 7 Plus | |
| Xiaomi Mi 6X | |
| Xiaomi Poco F1 | |
| Honor 8X | |
| BQ Aquaris X2 | |
| Sony Xperia XA2 | |
| Average Samsung Exynos 7885 () | |
| Average of class Smartphone (3.7 - 166, n=174, last 2 years) | |
| 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A8 2018 | |
| Nokia 7 Plus | |
| Xiaomi Mi 6X | |
| Xiaomi Poco F1 | |
| Honor 8X | |
| BQ Aquaris X2 | |
| Sony Xperia XA2 | |
| Average Samsung Exynos 7885 () | |
| Average of class Smartphone (8.3 - 365, n=174, last 2 years) | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
| Xiaomi Poco F1 (Chrome 68) | |
| Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 6X (Chrome 67) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A8 2018 (Chrome 64.0.3282.137) | |
| Average Samsung Exynos 7885 (48 - 49.1, n=2) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A7 2018 (Chrome 70) | |
| Honor 8X (Chrome 70) | |
| BQ Aquaris X2 (Chrome 67) | |
| Sony Xperia XA2 (Chrome 65.0.3325.109) | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=210, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Poco F1 (Chrome 68) | |
| Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 6X (Chrome 67) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A8 2018 (Chrome 64.0.3282.137) | |
| Average Samsung Exynos 7885 (9165 - 9350, n=2) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A7 2018 (Chrome 70) | |
| Honor 8X (Chrome 70) | |
| BQ Aquaris X2 (Chrome 67) | |
| Sony Xperia XA2 (Chrome 65.0.3325.109) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Sony Xperia XA2 (Chrome 65.0.3325.109) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 6X (Chrome 67) | |
| BQ Aquaris X2 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A8 2018 (Chrome 64.0.3282.137) | |
| Honor 8X | |
| Average Samsung Exynos 7885 (4123 - 4275, n=2) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A7 2018 (Chrome 70) | |
| Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60) | |
| Xiaomi Poco F1 (Chrome 68) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=167, last 2 years) | |
| WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
| Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years) | |
| Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 6X (Chrome 67) | |
| Honor 8X (Chrome 70) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A7 2018 (Chrome 70) | |
| Average Samsung Exynos 7885 () | |
| BQ Aquaris X2 (Chrome 67) | |
| WebXPRT 2015 - Overall | |
| Xiaomi Poco F1 (Chrome 68) | |
| Xiaomi Mi 6X (Chrome 67) | |
| Nokia 7 Plus (Chrome 60) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A7 2018 (Chrome 70) | |
| BQ Aquaris X2 (Chrome 67) | |
| Average Samsung Exynos 7885 (156 - 168, n=2) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A8 2018 (Chrome 64.0.3282.137) | |
| Honor 8X (Chrome 70) | |
| Sony Xperia XA2 (Chrome 65.0.3325.109) | |
* ... smaller is better
| Samsung Galaxy A7 2018 | Samsung Galaxy A8 2018 | Nokia 7 Plus | Xiaomi Mi 6X | Xiaomi Poco F1 | Honor 8X | BQ Aquaris X2 | Sony Xperia XA2 | Average 64 GB eMMC Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -2% | 15% | 5% | 39% | 51% | 3% | -6% | 22% | 996% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 295.8 | 299.9 1% | 283.1 -4% | 272 -8% | 705 138% | 283.9 -4% | 270.5 -9% | 271.5 -8% | 274 ? -7% | 1887 ? 538% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 104.9 | 104.2 -1% | 211.6 102% | 203.7 94% | 155.6 48% | 170 62% | 188.7 80% | 127.4 21% | 176.6 ? 68% | 1471 ? 1302% |
| Random Read 4KB | 84 | 82.6 -2% | 54.7 -35% | 73 -13% | 101 20% | 49.54 -41% | 43.9 -48% | 43.07 -49% | 59.4 ? -29% | 278 ? 231% |
| Random Write 4KB | 15.45 | 14.69 -5% | 19.62 27% | 6.89 -55% | 17.81 15% | 59.9 288% | 14.4 -7% | 13.82 -11% | 32.2 ? 108% | 311 ? 1913% |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 78.2 ? | 77.9 ? 0% | 82.2 5% | 85.3 ? 9% | 75.2 ? -4% | 82.9 ? 6% | 86 ? 10% | 77.4 ? -1% | ||
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 64.4 ? | 62.3 ? -3% | 62.3 -3% | 65.6 ? 2% | 68.1 ? 6% | 62.3 ? -3% | 64.8 ? 1% | 58.3 ? -9% |
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 34.8 °C / 95 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 35.8 °C / 96 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.
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 8.2% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 43% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 50% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 62% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 32% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Xiaomi Mi 6X audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 27.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 21% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 71% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 42% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 51% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| Off / Standby |   0.01 / 0.22 Watt |
| Idle |  0.71 / 1.36 / 1.47 Watt |
| Load |
5.13 / 7.89 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Samsung Galaxy A7 2018 3300 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A8 2018 3000 mAh | Nokia 7 Plus 3800 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 6X 3010 mAh | Xiaomi Poco F1 4000 mAh | Honor 8X 3750 mAh | BQ Aquaris X2 3100 mAh | Sony Xperia XA2 3300 mAh | Average Samsung Exynos 7885 | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 21% | -9% | -7% | -15% | -24% | -14% | 19% | 10% | -19% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.71 | 0.67 6% | 0.65 8% | 0.65 8% | 0.65 8% | 0.92 -30% | 0.65 8% | 0.39 45% | 0.69 ? 3% | 0.88 ? -24% |
| Idle Average * | 1.36 | 1.02 25% | 1.76 -29% | 1.94 -43% | 1.97 -45% | 2.3 -69% | 2.24 -65% | 1.61 -18% | 1.19 ? 12% | 1.444 ? -6% |
| Idle Maximum * | 1.47 | 1.1 25% | 1.78 -21% | 1.97 -34% | 2.01 -37% | 2.32 -58% | 2.26 -54% | 1.62 -10% | 1.285 ? 13% | 1.6 ? -9% |
| Load Average * | 5.13 | 3.86 25% | 4.47 13% | 4.65 9% | 4.29 16% | 4.37 15% | 3.87 25% | 3.12 39% | 4.5 ? 12% | 6.57 ? -28% |
| Load Maximum * | 7.89 | 5.97 24% | 9.13 -16% | 5.93 25% | 9.05 -15% | 6.13 22% | 6.8 14% | 4.92 38% | 6.93 ? 12% | 9.91 ? -26% |
* ... smaller is better
| Samsung Galaxy A7 2018 3300 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A8 2018 3000 mAh | Nokia 7 Plus 3800 mAh | Xiaomi Mi 6X 3010 mAh | Xiaomi Poco F1 4000 mAh | Honor 8X 3750 mAh | BQ Aquaris X2 3100 mAh | Sony Xperia XA2 3300 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 4% | -8% | -26% | 17% | 41% | 2% | 30% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1467 | 1546 5% | 1703 16% | 1046 -29% | 2088 42% | 2503 71% | ||
| H.264 | 836 | 908 9% | 706 -16% | 608 -27% | 936 12% | 766 -8% | ||
| WiFi v1.3 | 605 | 646 7% | 672 11% | 495 -18% | 808 34% | 852 41% | 617 2% | 886 46% |
| Load | 273 | 260 -5% | 158 -42% | 192 -30% | 220 -19% | 298 9% |
Pros
Cons
总结-中端手机中的屏幕素质标杆：
2018款三星Galaxy A7出色的Super AMOLED面板在我们的测试中有着出色的表现，这块屏幕亮度很高，具有极其精确的色彩还原以及稳定的可视角度。最重要的是，由于OLED屏幕的典型黑色值，它具有良好的对比度。总而言之，这是一个在这个价格范围内没有对手的屏幕。
三星自家的中端处理器给我们留下了并不那么深刻的印象。在我们的测试中，在日常工作负载下，Exynos 7885暴露出了一些缺点。三星SoC的系统性能完全跟不上高通。而配备新型海思麒麟710的荣耀 8X也可提供更加稳定的日常性能。
2018款Galaxy A7的噱头是它的三摄，它提供了极大的可玩性和不错的照片质量。超广角和实时聚焦功能为用户提供了有趣的选择，虽然后者有时会令人失望。
与荣耀8X一样，我们仍然想知道为什么三星仍然决定为其2018年的型号配备microUSB接口。这没有任何意义，特别是考虑到2017年的Galaxy A5就已经配备了USB Type-C接口。
“如果买家们正在寻找合适的中档价位设备，注重屏幕素质的人将无法绕过2018款三星Galaxy A7。”
在这个中档细分市场中有很多有趣的替代品可供选择。例如强大的Pocophone F1以及更便宜的性价比冠军小米A2。如果2018款三星Galaxy A7的价格略低一点，其出色的显示屏和广角相机使得它成为一个值得的选择。
Samsung Galaxy A7 2018
- 11/19/2018 v6 (old)
Marcus Herbrich
Price comparison
