三星Galaxy Note10+智能手机评测:优化后的SoC保证更好的续航
» Notebookcheck多媒体笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck游戏笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck低价办公/商务笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck高端办公/商务笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck工作站笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck亚笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck超级本产品Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck变形本产品Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck平板电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck智能手机Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck评测过最出色的笔记本电脑屏幕
» Notebookcheck售价500欧元以下笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck售价300欧元以下笔记本电脑Top 10排名
|
Brightness Distribution: 96 %
Center on Battery: 683 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.9 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 2.2 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
95.4% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.11
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ Dynamic AMOLED, 3040x1440, 6.8" | Samsung Galaxy S10 5G OLED, 3040x1440, 6.7" | Apple iPhone Xs Max OLED, 2688x1242, 6.5" | Huawei Mate 20 X OLED, 2244x1080, 7.2" | OnePlus 7 Pro AMOLED, 3120x1440, 6.7" | LG G8s ThinQ P-OLED, 2248x1080, 6.2" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | -19% | 15% | 12% | 16% | -21% | |
Brightness middle | 683 | 735 8% | 656 -4% | 421 -38% | 586 -14% | 539 -21% |
Brightness | 694 | 735 6% | 659 -5% | 418 -40% | 584 -16% | 556 -20% |
Brightness Distribution | 96 | 94 -2% | 88 -8% | 96 0% | 97 1% | 88 -8% |
Black Level * | ||||||
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 2.9 | 3.9 -34% | 1.7 41% | 1.1 62% | 1.39 52% | 3.78 -30% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 4.8 | 10.9 -127% | 2.8 42% | 2.2 54% | 2.7 44% | 6.95 -45% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.2 | 1.4 36% | 1.7 23% | 1.4 36% | 1.6 27% | 2.2 -0% |
Gamma | 2.11 104% | 2.09 105% | 1.998 110% | 2.23 99% | 2.243 98% | 2.274 97% |
CCT | 6247 104% | 6549 99% | 6487 100% | 6723 97% | 6672 97% | 6013 108% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 250 Hz | ≤ 99 % brightness setting | |
The display backlight flickers at 250 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 250 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 | ||
---|---|---|
3.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 2 ms rise | |
↘ 1.2 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. » 11 % 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 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 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 11 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). |
PCMark for Android | |
Work performance score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G | |
Huawei Mate 20 X | |
OnePlus 7 Pro | |
LG G8s ThinQ | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9825 (11011 - 11813, n=2) | |
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G | |
Huawei Mate 20 X | |
OnePlus 7 Pro | |
LG G8s ThinQ | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9825 (8801 - 9027, n=2) |
Basemark GPU 1.1 | |
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ | |
OnePlus 7 Pro | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9825 (39.1 - 39.7, n=2) | |
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ | |
OnePlus 7 Pro | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9825 (27.5 - 37.3, n=2) | |
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ | |
OnePlus 7 Pro | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9825 (33.4 - 33.7, n=2) |
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G | |
Apple iPhone Xs Max | |
Huawei Mate 20 X | |
OnePlus 7 Pro | |
LG G8s ThinQ | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9825 (347082 - 347229, n=2) |
VRMark - Amber Room (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ | |
OnePlus 7 Pro | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9825 (4985 - 4996, n=2) | |
Average of class Smartphone (2523 - 10071, n=6, last 2 years) |
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value) | |
Apple iPhone Xs Max | |
OnePlus 7 Pro | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9825 () | |
Average of class Smartphone (205 - 7616, n=56, last 2 years) |
Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=164, last 2 years) | |
OnePlus 7 Pro (Chrome 74) | |
LG G8s ThinQ (Chrome 75) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9825 (42.7 - 48, n=2) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G (Samung Browser 9.2) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ (Samung Browser 9.2) |
Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=150, last 2 years) | |
LG G8s ThinQ (Chome 75) | |
OnePlus 7 Pro (Chome 74) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9825 () | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G (Samsung Browser 9.2) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ (Samsung Browser 9.2) |
WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12) | |
Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ (Samsung Browser 9.2) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G | |
OnePlus 7 Pro (Chrome 74) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9825 (97 - 118, n=2) | |
LG G8s ThinQ (Chrome 75) | |
Huawei Mate 20 X (hrome 71) |
Octane V2 - Total Score | |
Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12) | |
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=205, last 2 years) | |
OnePlus 7 Pro (Chrome 74) | |
LG G8s ThinQ (Chrome 75) | |
Huawei Mate 20 X (hrome 71) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G (Samsung Browser 9.2) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ (Samsung Browser 9.2) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9825 (18908 - 19135, n=2) |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ (Samsung Browser 9.2) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 9825 (2478 - 2528, n=2) | |
Huawei Mate 20 X (hrome 71) | |
LG G8s ThinQ (Chrome 75) | |
OnePlus 7 Pro (Chrome 74) | |
Samsung Galaxy S10 5G (Samsung Browser 9.2) | |
Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=163, last 2 years) | |
Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12) |
* ... smaller is better
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ | Samsung Galaxy S10 5G | Huawei Mate 20 X | OnePlus 7 Pro | LG G8s ThinQ | Average 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AndroBench 3-5 | -56% | -11% | -33% | -43% | 2% | 70% | |
Sequential Read 256KB | 1504 | 816 -46% | 912 -39% | 1468 -2% | 791 -47% | 1547 ? 3% | 1863 ? 24% |
Sequential Write 256KB | 588 | 246.3 -58% | 182.7 -69% | 387 -34% | 182.4 -69% | 575 ? -2% | 1446 ? 146% |
Random Read 4KB | 196.2 | 135 -31% | 144.4 -26% | 174.1 -11% | 138 -30% | 210 ? 7% | 278 ? 42% |
Random Write 4KB | 183.6 | 23.79 -87% | 237.6 29% | 24.8 -86% | 29.6 -84% | 188.5 ? 3% | 309 ? 68% |
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 71 ? | 83.1 ? 17% | 67.5 ? -5% | 70.6 ? -1% | |||
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 59.5 ? | 72 ? 21% | 46.7 ? -22% | 59.8 ? 1% |
PUBG Mobile HD
Asphalt 9 (High Details)
Battle Bay
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 34.2 °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 35.9 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.9 °C / 86 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.1% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (2.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 22% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 69% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 43% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 49% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Huawei Mate 20 X audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.7% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.1% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 29% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 62% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 49% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 43% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Off / Standby | 0.01 / 0.22 Watt |
Idle | 0.7 / 1.81 / 1.92 Watt |
Load |
7.57 / 9.34 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ 4300 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S10 5G 4500 mAh | Apple iPhone Xs Max 3174 mAh | Huawei Mate 20 X 5000 mAh | OnePlus 7 Pro 4000 mAh | LG G8s ThinQ 3550 mAh | Average Samsung Exynos 9825 | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | 5% | 12% | 4% | -8% | -7% | -1% | 3% | |
Idle Minimum * | 0.7 | 0.66 6% | 1 -43% | 0.79 -13% | 0.9 -29% | 1.2 -71% | 0.8 ? -14% | 0.885 ? -26% |
Idle Average * | 1.81 | 1.82 -1% | 1.4 23% | 1.72 5% | 1.8 1% | 1.6 12% | 1.505 ? 17% | 1.451 ? 20% |
Idle Maximum * | 1.92 | 1.83 5% | 1.7 11% | 1.83 5% | 2.9 -51% | 2 -4% | 1.96 ? -2% | 1.608 ? 16% |
Load Average * | 7.57 | 6.11 19% | 4.6 39% | 5.53 27% | 5.5 27% | 5 34% | 7.64 ? -1% | 6.55 ? 13% |
Load Maximum * | 9.34 | 9.81 -5% | 6.7 28% | 9.85 -5% | 8.2 12% | 10 -7% | 9.92 ? -6% | 9.92 ? -6% |
* ... smaller is better
Samsung Galaxy Note10+ 4300 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S10 5G 4500 mAh | Apple iPhone Xs Max 3174 mAh | Huawei Mate 20 X 5000 mAh | OnePlus 7 Pro 4000 mAh | LG G8s ThinQ 3550 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | 17% | -5% | 19% | 4% | -4% | |
Reader / Idle | 1585 | 2340 48% | 1305 -18% | 1984 25% | 1745 10% | 1689 7% |
H.264 | 934 | 1047 12% | 801 -14% | 986 6% | 802 -14% | 753 -19% |
WiFi v1.3 | 532 | 533 0% | 742 39% | 786 48% | 768 44% | 693 30% |
Load | 305 | 327 7% | 223 -27% | 300 -2% | 236 -23% | 203 -33% |
Pros
Cons
三星Galaxy Note 10+是一台极具吸引力的手机,但这一切是有代价的,特别是它的价格明显高于其前代产品。超声波指纹传感器和摄像头是相对Note 9的改进,但新的S-Pen手势的实用性值得怀疑。此外,虽然S-Pen很不错,但我们怀疑很少有人会在日常使用中从中获得任何加成。此外,我们无法理解为什么三星选择在其最昂贵的旗舰产品中省略1 TB选项和3D人脸识别功能。
大,强,美-三星Galaxy Note 10+是一款出色的智能手机,但没有提供比上一代Galaxy Note或者Galaxy S10更多的功能。
尽管如此,Note 10+是一款功能齐全的智能手机,除了耳机插孔之外,它包括了所有东西。三星对于支持某些蓝牙编解码器的固执己见也仍然困扰着我们。
尽管Exynos 9825的效率比其前任产品更高,但其优势只有在持续负载下才能体现出来。与我们测试过的先前旗舰三星智能手机一样,Note 10+的电池续航也很短。
总体而言,这是一款出色的旗舰产品,也是你可以买到的最好的智能手机之一。
Samsung Galaxy Note10+
- 09/03/2022 v7 (old)
Daniel Schmidt