Huawei Nova
Specifications
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix f/2,0, 拍照最大 3264 x 2448 像素
Price comparison
Average of 49 scores (from 92 reviews)
Reviews for the Huawei Nova
简单的选择。 就像同系列5.5英寸的Nova Plus一样,华为Nova在制造工艺方面几乎达到了高端产品的水平。而且实际上,这台5英寸的手机在测试中展现出了更多的功能并且给了中端竞品很大的压力。
Source: Tech Girl EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
The Nova isn’t a bad phone. But it is a R6 999 phone. So I expect it to impress me more than some of the 3k smartphones I’ve been playing with. It didn’t. Don’t get me wrong, it has some great features which include the premium design, great graphics and super battery power (I didn’t mention this earlier – the battery power is top class). However, when it comes down to it I just don’t think the price tag justifies what you’re getting. Rather splurge a bit more and get the Mate 9.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 02/22/2017
Source: Htxt Africa EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
The price point is too high for a phone that under performs. The camera is great however, and so is the battery but that isn’t enough for me to justify a recommendation.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 02/10/2017
Rating: Total score: 60%
Source: Tech Smart EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
Getting your hands on a Nova will cost R6 999, as recommended by Huawei. At that price it is a solid R1k to R2k less than most of the premium mid-range phones it's going up against. When it comes to a competitive market like that, it's a decided advantage, especially when most of these devices are sporting comparable specifications.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 02/07/2017
Source: Mobile Choice EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
The Nova is one of the most elegantly designed phones in the market today, with tiny bezels and a very palm-friendly 5-inch screen size.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 01/16/2017
Rating: Total score: 70% performance: 60% mobility: 70%
Source: Pocket Lint EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
The Huawei Nova is a decent small-scale Android phone. It sits in a place in the market where there's desperate need for quality without an overly hefty price tag.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 12/14/2016
Rating: Total score: 70%
Source: Toptenreviews EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
In today’s competitive phone market, the Nova needs to be cheaper, but it’s a fine device with no big drawbacks.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 12/10/2016
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: What Mobile EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
The Huawei Nova is a perfectly good mid-range handset that has solid performance and excellent design. The problem is that it costs about £50 more than other handsets which arguably offer more value for money. While it is a very good device, the jury is still out on whether you should pick this over handsets such as the Vodafone Smart Platinum 7 and OnePlus 3.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 12/08/2016
Rating: Total score: 78% price: 70% performance: 80% display: 80% workmanship: 80%
Source: Digital Trends EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
No. Although the Nova is a great phone, it’s simply overpriced. If it cost $300, it would be worth considering, but at 400 euros, it’s way off the mark. No matter how much you value style, no one wants to overpay for a smartphone, and that’s what you’ll do with the Nova. Game over, Huawei.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/09/2016
Rating: Total score: 60%
Source: New Atlas EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
We enjoyed our time with these two phones and they tick a lot of the right boxes – particular in design and battery life – but we don't think Huawei has quite done enough to make an impact in a very congested market. If it can build on what it's done with the Nova and Nova Plus, and get European and US carriers more interested in the coming months, then the 2017 editions could be much more appealing propositions.
Comparison, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/26/2016
Source: International Business Times EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
The Huawei Nova and Nova Plus are perfectly capable mid-range handsets from Huawei that offer solid specs at a reasonable price point. While they lack imagination from a design perspective, both are well-built and premium-looking, at times echoing the phones Huawei hopes to replace at the top of the smartphone pecking order. However, there's nothing on offer here to tip them much above the average mark, and once again Huawei's software prevents the smartphones from feeling like something that could pose a serious threat to its Android rivals. And in the mid-range smartphone market, Huawei has a lot to contend with.
Comparison, online available, Long, Date: 10/20/2016
Rating: Total score: 60%
Source: Tech Advisor EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
So, what do we think of the Huawei Nova? While it’s good on paper, it’s slightly underwhelming in real life. The processor isn’t quite as quick as the competition, the graphical capabilities aren’t great and the quality of low-light photography is less than expected, even for a mid-range smartphone. What is good is the design – it’s sleek, gorgeous and is extremely comfortable to use, and definitely doesn’t look like a ~£300 smartphone. While it’ll suffice for the likes of Facebook, Snapchat and managing email, we wouldn’t recommend it for high-end gaming or for use as a replacement DSLR. With companies like OnePlus dominating the mid-range scene with high-end internals, it makes it hard to recommend the fairly average Huawei Nova.
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/19/2016
Rating: Total score: 60% price: 50% performance: 50% features: 70% workmanship: 90%
Source: Phone Arena EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
In the end, neither of these phones is likely to steer you wrong, especially if you're not demanding a ton from your smartphone – and if you want a handset that feels great to hold, and has a battery that won't leave you hanging, either makes a really nice choice. But there's also not a lot here that screams THIS is the mid-priced phone to get. As a result, we'd definitely recommend considering these two Novas – but maybe check out some phones from the competition, as well.
Comparison, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/14/2016
Rating: Total score: 73%
Source: It Pro EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
However, the Nova has one massive problem, and that problem is the OnePlus 3. The OnePlus 3 beats the Nova in every conceivable category - from performance to battery life to build quality - and has the added edge of being even cheaper. It's also available from O2, so there's no excuse not to pick it up.
Single Review, online available, Very Short, Date: 10/10/2016
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Trusted Reviews EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
In many ways, the Nova is a great phone. The handset looks great, has a decent display, and offers stellar battery life. A year ago, it would probably have been one of my recommended mid-range handsets, despite the fact it has a below average camera.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/04/2016
Rating: Total score: 70% performance: 70% display: 70% mobility: 80% workmanship: 80%
Source: Stuff TV EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
If you can live with a custom Android skin, it definitely beats the plastic fantastic of other cheap phones out there. The only problem is price. The OnePlus 3 is still one of the best value phones out there right now, and even a Brexit-related price hike can’t change that. You’re getting much more phone for your money, complete with customisable covers and Stock Android.
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 10/03/2016
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: GSM Arena EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
Indeed, the Huawei nova has a lot to offer - Nexus 6P-like beautiful design, a 2.5D curved glass, an airplane-grade aluminum, a flagship fingerprint sensor, and premium camera features. And while the Nova is new on the market, Huawei has already proved it can combine all these ingredients in an awesome way in previous smartphones.
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/03/2016
Source: Expert Reviews EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
Despite the niggles, there’s plenty to like about Huawei’s latest Nova handset. With its vibrant, curved-edge screen, smooth performance and battery life that will last you a full working day, it should serve you well, but the problem is it’s up against some pretty fierce competition in this price bracket.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 09/29/2016
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Android Authority EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
With 3GB of RAM, 32GB of internal storage, 4K video recording and Full HD displays then the nova and nova plus certainly have the hallmarks of couple of upper mid-range devices. That is even more so for the nova plus with its built-in OIS and larger display. The main weaknesses are the the processor package, and the camera setup.
Comparison, online available, Medium, Date: 09/21/2016
Rating: Total score: 83% performance: 80% display: 80% mobility: 90% workmanship: 85%
Source: Recombu EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
The Nova is a slick bit of hardware which boasts particularly impressive battery life, as well as offering a solid media experience. However, the software issues and glitches can make it quite a frustrating experience at times and performance is clearly limited.
Single Review, online available, Very Short, Date: 09/12/2016
Rating: Total score: 70%
Source: Tech Advisor EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
So, what do we think of the Huawei Nova? For a mid-range smartphone, it boasts impressive capabilities – especially in the camera department. While it doesn’t have dual-snappers like the P9, its performance in low-light conditions is impressive. It’s gorgeous too, and feels comfortable in the hand – in fact, it feels more like a high-end smartphone than a mid-range smartphone, the hallmark of Huawei. The biggest question is – is it worth the money? While no UK pricing has been announced, the 399 Euro price tag puts it in line with smartphones including the OnePlus 3, which offers a more powerful processor and more RAM – but we’ll hold our reservations until we get one back to PC Advisor towers. Make sure you check back soon for a more thorough verdict!
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 09/05/2016
Source: International Business Times EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
The Huawei Nova and Nova Plus are unlikely to shake things up at the high end of the smartphone spectrum, but that's not the intention anyway. Instead, the devices are an attempt to tap into a burgeoning middle tier dominated by the likes of Samsung, Sony and LG and prove that no place is safe from the Chinese manufacturer's onslaught. On the other hand, despite their solid hardware and (mostly) good looks, there's no escaping the fact that the Nova and Nova Plus are two more additions to an ocean of mid-range smartphones.
Comparison, online available, Very Short, Date: 09/01/2016
Source: Pocket Lint EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
There's a lot to love about the Huawei Nova. It's a mid-range handset that wants to bring you adequate power, with specs that matter, and a build that's class leading. The mid-range is in many ways more interesting and disruptive than the flagship level in Android devices and that's true of the Nova.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 09/01/2016
Source: Stuff TV EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
The mid-range market is seriously heating up this year. Motorola used to rule the roost, but now there are some major contenders for the top spot - and based on a quick 15 minute fondle with the Nova, it could be one of them. I'm a big fan of the all-metal build, it ticks all the right boxes when it comes to hardware, and has extras like a fingerprint sensor that are quickly becoming must-haves for any phone.
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 09/01/2016
Source: Techradar EN→zh-CN Archive.org version
While we need to delve more thoroughly into it, the speed on offer and battery life could be really decent for the price – the camera we're less sure about, as Huawei still hasn't nailed the snapping experience at the top end, but there are some decent manual modes to play with at least.
Single Review, online available, Very Short, Date: 09/01/2016
Source: PocketPC DE→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 07/23/2017
Source: Chinahandys.net DE→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 07/20/2017
Rating: Total score: 85% performance: 80% display: 80% mobility: 80% workmanship: 90%
Source: Android Mag DE→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Short, Date: 03/16/2017
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Marijan bloggt DE→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 01/31/2017
Source: A1 Blog DE→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 12/13/2016
Source: Marijan bloggt DE→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 12/09/2016
Rating: Total score: 88% performance: 95% display: 95% mobility: 90%
Source: Go2 Mobile DE→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 12/06/2016
Source: Computerbild - Heft 24/2016
Single Review, , Length Unknown, Date: 11/15/2016
Rating: Total score: 90%
Source: WinFuture DE→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 11/14/2016
Source: Chip.de DE→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 11/08/2016
Rating: Total score: 89% performance: 97% features: 78% display: 83% mobility: 91%
Source: Android Pit DE→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 11/04/2016
Rating: Total score: 70%
Source: Blick DE→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 11/03/2016
Source: Technik Surfer DE→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/30/2016
Rating: Total score: 74% price: 70% performance: 80% mobility: 70% workmanship: 90% ergonomy: 80%
Source: Notebooksbilliger Blog DE→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/28/2016
Source: Turn On DE→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 10/17/2016
Source: WinFuture DE→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 10/07/2016
Source: e-media - Heft 11/2016
Single Review, online available, Very Short, Date: 10/01/2016
Source: Curved DE→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 09/16/2016
Rating: Total score: 82% performance: 75% display: 80% mobility: 85%
Source: Netzwelt DE→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 09/02/2016
Source: WinFuture DE→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 09/01/2016
Source: Andro Asia ES→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 02/20/2017
Rating: Total score: 86% performance: 85% display: 80% mobility: 90%
Source: Movil Zona ES→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 12/30/2016
Rating: Total score: 70% price: 70% performance: 70% display: 80% mobility: 90% workmanship: 80%
Source: 4G News PT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 12/20/2016
Source: Aberto ate de Madrugada PT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 11/22/2016
Source: Pplware PT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/21/2016
Rating: Total score: 85% performance: 85% display: 85% mobility: 87% workmanship: 85%
Source: Wintech PT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 11/16/2016
Rating: price: 83% performance: 80% mobility: 90% workmanship: 90%
Source: Mais Tecnologia PT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/13/2016
Source: Android Geek PT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 11/04/2016
Source: Android Geek PT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 10/14/2016
Source: Smartphone e tablet android IT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 07/19/2017
Rating: performance: 80% display: 80% mobility: 70% workmanship: 70%
Source: Androidiani IT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 04/27/2017
Rating: Total score: 75% performance: 70% display: 70% mobility: 90% workmanship: 90%
Source: Androidiani IT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 03/24/2017
Source: Stockisti IT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 12/20/2016
Source: Techzilla.it IT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 12/15/2016
Rating: Total score: 85% price: 80% performance: 80% display: 85% mobility: 90% workmanship: 95%
Source: Smartphone Italia IT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 12/10/2016
Rating: price: 80% features: 80% display: 80% mobility: 90% ergonomy: 90%
Source: Pianeta Cellulare IT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 12/08/2016
Source: Tecno Cino IT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 12/03/2016
Source: Smartphone Italia IT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 11/29/2016
Source: Batista70Phone IT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 11/18/2016
Rating: Total score: 88% price: 70% display: 90% mobility: 100% ergonomy: 100%
Source: Leonardo.it Tech IT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 11/09/2016
Rating: Total score: 82% price: 80% features: 78% display: 75% mobility: 90% ergonomy: 95%
Source: HDblog.it IT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 11/03/2016
Rating: Total score: 83%
Source: Andrea Galeazzi IT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 11/02/2016
Rating: Total score: 83% price: 78% display: 78% mobility: 90% workmanship: 84%
Source: Andrea Galeazzi IT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 11/02/2016
Rating: Total score: 83% price: 78% mobility: 90% workmanship: 84%
Source: AndroidWorld.it IT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 11/02/2016
Rating: Total score: 82% price: 75% features: 75% display: 80% mobility: 80% ergonomy: 85%
Source: Smartphone e tablet android IT→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 10/11/2016
Rating: performance: 80% display: 80% mobility: 80% workmanship: 70%
Source: AndroidWorld.nl NL→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/24/2016
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Portablegear NL→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Short, Date: 10/24/2016
Source: All About Phones NL→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 10/21/2016
Rating: Total score: 70%
Source: PCM NL→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 10/18/2016
Rating: Total score: 100%
Source: Computer Totaal NL→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Medium, Date: 10/18/2016
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Bright.nl NL→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Short, Date: 09/01/2016
Source: Les Mobiles FR→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 03/17/2017
Rating: Total score: 70%
Source: Top for Phone FR→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 12/04/2016
Source: AndroidPit.fr FR→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Long, Date: 11/24/2016
Rating: Total score: 70%
Source: AndroidPit.fr FR→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/14/2016
Rating: Total score: 70%
Source: Phonandroid FR→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/07/2016
Source: Frandroid FR→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 10/07/2016
Rating: Total score: 80% performance: 70% display: 80% mobility: 80% workmanship: 90%
Source: Komputerswiat PL→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 02/02/2017
Source: Tabletowo PL→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/13/2016
Rating: Total score: 83% performance: 80% display: 75% mobility: 90% workmanship: 90%
Source: Helpix RU→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 04/29/2017
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Yamobi RU→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 12/16/2016
Source: Product Test RU→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 12/15/2016
Rating: Total score: 83%
Source: Ferra.ru RU→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 12/01/2016
Rating: Total score: 80%
Source: Zoom RU→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/16/2016
Source: Hitech Vesti RU→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/11/2016
Source: Smartfoun.cz CZ→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 05/01/2017
Rating: Total score: 80% price: 90% performance: 80% display: 70% mobility: 90%
Source: CNews.cz CZ→zh-CN Archive.org version
Single Review, online available, Very Long, Date: 11/21/2016
Comment
Qualcomm Adreno 506:
» Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Graphics Cards and the corresponding Benchmark List.
625:
中端八核处理器,搭配8个ARM Cortex-A53处理核心,频率最高2GHz,一颗Adreno 506显卡芯片,一个DDR3L-1866内存控制器和X9 LTE(Cat. 7)网络模组。采用最新的14纳米制程技术制造。
» Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Processsors.
5.00": 这是常见的智能手机对角线尺寸。» To find out how fine a display is, see our DPI List.
» Further information can be found in our Notebook Purchase Guide.