小米 Mi 5s 智能手机简短评测

Name: Xiaomi Mi 5s
Brand: Xiaomi

它很特别？ 去年，小米Mi 5智能手机非凡的性价比而给我们留下了深刻印象。这次，我们将看看续作Mi 5s，它带有更多存储、坚固的金属外壳和更好的功能。它拥有时下最快的处理器：骁龙SoC。

Andreas Kilian, ✓ Stefanie Voigt (translated by Kangfei Zheng), Published 03/13/2017 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

Android ARM Smartphone Touchscreen

Test device courtesy of Trading Shenzen

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Xiaomi Mi 5s (Mi Series)

Processor

Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro 4 x 2.15 GHz, Kryo

Graphics adapter

Qualcomm Adreno 530, Core: 624 MHz

Memory

4 GB

, LPDDR4

Display

5.15 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 428 PPI, capacitive, IPS, glossy: yes

Storage

128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash, 128 GB

, 119 GB free

Connections

1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5 毫米耳麦插口, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: 加速度传感器，陀螺仪，霍尔效应传感器，接近传感器，罗盘，气压计, Miracast, DLNA, USB-OTG

Networking

802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 4.2, 2G (850/900/1800/1900 MHz), 3G (850/900/1900/2100 MHz), TD-SCDMA: (Bänder: 34/39), LTE: (Bänder 1/3/5/7/38/39/40/41), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS

Size

height x width x depth (in mm): 8.25 x 145.6 x 70.3

Battery

12.1 Wh, 3200 mAh Lithium-Polymer, Quickcharge 3.0

Camera

Primary Camera: 12 MPix autofocus f/2.0, 2160p video @ 30 fps, Sony IMX 378
Secondary Camera: 4 MPix fixed focus f/2.0, 1080p video @ 30 fps)

Additional features

Speakers: 底部单声道扬声器, Keyboard: 虚拟键盘, 电源适配器，数据线, MIUI8, 12 Months Warranty, fanless

Weight

145 g, Power Supply: 65 g

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
Apple iPhone 7 A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe (Klaus I211)	485 MBit/s +79%
Samsung Galaxy S7 Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	335 MBit/s +24%
OnePlus 3T Adreno 530, SD 821, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	313 MBit/s +15%
Xiaomi Mi 5s Adreno 530, SD 821, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	271 MBit/s
Huawei P9 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash	185 MBit/s -32%
Lenovo Moto Z Play Adreno 506, 625, 32 GB eMMC Flash	112 MBit/s -59%
iperf3 receive AX12
Apple iPhone 7 A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe (Klaus I211)	532 MBit/s +71%
Xiaomi Mi 5s Adreno 530, SD 821, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	312 MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy S7 Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	281 MBit/s -10%
Huawei P9 Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash	279 MBit/s -11%
OnePlus 3T Adreno 530, SD 821, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	257 MBit/s -18%
Lenovo Moto Z Play Adreno 506, 625, 32 GB eMMC Flash	121 MBit/s -61%

Photo of the ColorChecker chart; the lower half of each patch shows the original color.

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


570 cd/m²	621 cd/m²	579 cd/m²
585 cd/m²	627 cd/m²	585 cd/m²
590 cd/m²	615 cd/m²	588 cd/m²

Distribution of brightness

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2

Maximum: 627 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 595.6 cd/m² Minimum: 1.15 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 91 %
Center on Battery: 593 cd/m²
Contrast: 1045:1 (Black: 0.6 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.5 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 4.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.26

	Xiaomi Mi 5s IPS, 1920x1080, 5.2"	Samsung Galaxy S7 SAMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.1"	OnePlus 3T Optic-AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.5"	Huawei P9 IPS-NEO, JDI, 1920x1080, 5.2"	HTC 10 Super LCD 5, 2560x1440, 5.2"	Xiaomi Mi 5 IPS, 1920x1080, 5.2"
Screen
Brightness middle	627	350 -44%	421 -33%	582 -7%	445 -29%	598 -5%
Brightness	596	351 -41%	430 -28%	563 -6%	434 -27%	566 -5%
Brightness Distribution	91	98 8%	84 -8%	91 0%	93 2%	90 -1%
Black Level *	0.6			0.38 37%	0.36 40%	0.51 15%
Contrast	1045			1532 47%	1236 18%	1173 12%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	4.5	2.04 55%	7.1 -58%	4.4 2%	2.8 38%	3.5 22%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	7.5	3.25 57%	15.3 -104%	7.4 1%	5.8 23%	6.1 19%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	4.5	1.63 64%	6.8 -51%	4.8 -7%	3.7 18%	3.5 22%
Gamma	2.26 ^97%	2.07 ^106%	2.23 ^99%	2.2 ^100%	2.31 ^95%	2.29 ^96%
CCT	7427 ^88%	6391 ^102%	7866 ^83%	6175 ^105%	7164 ^91%	6532 ^100%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)		86.86		77.78
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)		99.35		99.44

* ... 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

2273 Hz

≤ 17 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 2273 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 17 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 2273 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8719 (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
40 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 13 ms rise
40 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 27 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 97 % 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
45 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 21 ms rise
45 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 24 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. » 74 % 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)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	148698 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	127902 Points -14%
OnePlus 3T	159866 Points +8%
Huawei P9	95743 Points -36%
HTC 10	131866 Points -11%
Xiaomi Mi 5	116330 Points -22%

BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	1020 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	957 Points -6%
OnePlus 3T	891 Points -13%
Huawei P9	1029 Points +1%
HTC 10	928 Points -9%
Xiaomi Mi 5	1106 Points +8%
Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	5033 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	1723 Points -66%
OnePlus 3T	4444 Points -12%
Huawei P9	1583 Points -69%
HTC 10	5009 Points 0%
Xiaomi Mi 5	4522 Points -10%
Memory (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	1740 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	2244 Points +29%
OnePlus 3T	1954 Points +12%
Huawei P9	2627 Points +51%
HTC 10	1772 Points +2%
Xiaomi Mi 5	1801 Points +4%
System (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	3387 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	4217 Points +25%
OnePlus 3T	3130 Points -8%
Huawei P9	3930 Points +16%
HTC 10	2806 Points -17%
Xiaomi Mi 5	3638 Points +7%
Overall (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	2345 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	1987 Points -15%
OnePlus 3T	2218 Points -5%
Huawei P9	2025 Points -14%
HTC 10	2193 Points -6%
Xiaomi Mi 5	2392 Points +2%

Geekbench 4.0
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	4292 Points
OnePlus 3T	4236 Points -1%
Huawei P9	4904 Points +14%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	1728 Points
OnePlus 3T	1881 Points +9%
Huawei P9	1755 Points +2%
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	7259 Points
Huawei P9	3077 Points -58%

PCMark for Android - Work performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	5121 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	4826 Points -6%
OnePlus 3T	5664 Points +11%
Huawei P9	7058 Points +38%
HTC 10	5809 Points +13%
Xiaomi Mi 5	6873 Points +34%

Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	9378 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	13161 Points +40%
OnePlus 3T	9798 Points +4%
Huawei P9	11783 Points +26%
HTC 10	8905 Points -5%
Xiaomi Mi 5	8619 Points -8%

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	2580 ms *
Samsung Galaxy S7	2562 ms * +1%
OnePlus 3T	2719 ms * -5%
Huawei P9	2923 ms * -13%
HTC 10	3146 ms * -22%
Xiaomi Mi 5	2973 ms * -15%

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	57 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	74 Points +30%
OnePlus 3T	54.5 Points -4%
Huawei P9	68.4 Points +20%
HTC 10	52.1 Points -9%
Xiaomi Mi 5	54 Points -5%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	60 fps
Samsung Galaxy S7	53 fps -12%
OnePlus 3T	59 fps -2%
Huawei P9	43 fps -28%
HTC 10	43 fps -28%
Xiaomi Mi 5	60 fps 0%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	93 fps
Samsung Galaxy S7	84 fps -10%
OnePlus 3T	91 fps -2%
Huawei P9	40 fps -57%
HTC 10	73 fps -22%
Xiaomi Mi 5	90 fps -3%

GFXBench 3.0
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	49 fps
Samsung Galaxy S7	40 fps -18%
OnePlus 3T	46 fps -6%
Huawei P9	18 fps -63%
HTC 10	39 fps -20%
Xiaomi Mi 5	42 fps -14%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	48 fps
Samsung Galaxy S7	27 fps -44%
OnePlus 3T	45 fps -6%
Huawei P9	19 fps -60%
HTC 10	24 fps -50%
Xiaomi Mi 5	42 fps -12%

GFXBench 3.1
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	32 fps
Samsung Galaxy S7	28 fps -12%
OnePlus 3T	32 fps 0%
Huawei P9	10 fps -69%
HTC 10	24 fps -25%
Xiaomi Mi 5	30 fps -6%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	32 fps
Samsung Galaxy S7	15 fps -53%
OnePlus 3T	32 fps 0%
Huawei P9	11 fps -66%
HTC 10	14 fps -56%
Xiaomi Mi 5	31 fps -3%

3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	22372 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	19944 Points -11%
OnePlus 3T	22426 Points 0%
Huawei P9	15517 Points -31%
HTC 10	20344 Points -9%
Xiaomi Mi 5	21483 Points -4%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	34202 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	33348 Points -2%
OnePlus 3T	34494 Points +1%
Huawei P9	21577 Points -37%
HTC 10	30061 Points -12%
Xiaomi Mi 5	32613 Points -5%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	30606 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	29015 Points -5%
OnePlus 3T	30810 Points +1%
Huawei P9	19854 Points -35%
HTC 10	27176 Points -11%
Xiaomi Mi 5	29246 Points -4%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	1927 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	2010 Points +4%
OnePlus 3T	1452 Points -25%
Huawei P9	2510 Points +30%
HTC 10	1512 Points -22%
Xiaomi Mi 5	1976 Points +3%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	4746 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	3018 Points -36%
OnePlus 3T	3310 Points -30%
Huawei P9	1080 Points -77%
HTC 10	4581 Points -3%
Xiaomi Mi 5	4558 Points -4%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	3580 Points
Samsung Galaxy S7	2715 Points -24%
OnePlus 3T	2577 Points -28%
Huawei P9	1237 Points -65%
HTC 10	3157 Points -12%
Xiaomi Mi 5	3542 Points -1%

AndroBench 3-5
Random Write 4KB (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	15.08 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy S7	16.01 MB/s +6%
OnePlus 3T	74.4 MB/s +393%
Huawei P9	47.45 MB/s +215%
HTC 10	15.89 MB/s +5%
Xiaomi Mi 5	13.61 MB/s -10%
Random Read 4KB (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	100.3 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy S7	85.9 MB/s -14%
OnePlus 3T	123.6 MB/s +23%
Huawei P9	39 MB/s -61%
HTC 10	29.92 MB/s -70%
Xiaomi Mi 5	106.8 MB/s +6%
Sequential Write 256KB (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	153.5 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy S7	145.7 MB/s -5%
OnePlus 3T	165.3 MB/s +8%
Huawei P9	72.2 MB/s -53%
HTC 10	115.6 MB/s -25%
Xiaomi Mi 5	159.3 MB/s +4%
Sequential Read 256KB (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 5s	412.7 MB/s
Samsung Galaxy S7	483.8 MB/s +17%
OnePlus 3T	436.4 MB/s +6%
Huawei P9	281.3 MB/s -32%
HTC 10	275.1 MB/s -33%
Xiaomi Mi 5	459.6 MB/s +11%

Legend

Xiaomi Mi 5s Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash

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

OnePlus 3T Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash

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

HTC 10 Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 32 GB eMMC Flash

Xiaomi Mi 5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash

* ... smaller is better

Max. Load

Idle


39.9 °C	40.4 °C	39 °C
39.2 °C	40.5 °C	39.1 °C
37.1 °C	37.3 °C	38.5 °C

Maximum: 40.5 °C
Average: 39 °C


34.2 °C	35.8 °C	36 °C
35.2 °C	35.4 °C	36.4 °C
35 °C	35.3 °C	35.9 °C

Maximum: 36.4 °C
Average: 35.5 °C

Power Supply (max.) 29.9 °C | Room Temperature 21.4 °C | Voltcraft IR-260

(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 39 °C / 102 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 40.5 °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 36.4 °C / 98 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 30.5 °C / 87 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.

Xiaomi Mi 5s audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 18.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.8% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.1% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 55% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 38% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 71% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 22% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Xiaomi Mi 5 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.7% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 8.9% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 45% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 48% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 64% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 30% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Power Consumption

Off / Standby	0 / 0.14 Watt
Idle	0.4 / 1.7 / 1.81 Watt
Load	5.84 / 9.12 Watt


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

	Xiaomi Mi 5s 3200 mAh	Samsung Galaxy S7 3000 mAh	OnePlus 3T 3400 mAh	Huawei P9 3000 mAh	HTC 10 3000 mAh	Xiaomi Mi 5 3000 mAh
Power Consumption		9%	-18%	-15%	-19%	-4%
Idle Minimum *	0.4	0.68 -70%	0.61 -53%	0.77 -93%	0.68 -70%	0.45 -13%
Idle Average *	1.7	1.02 40%	1.77 -4%	2.36 -39%	1.49 12%	1.68 1%
Idle Maximum *	1.81	1.14 37%	1.81 -0%	2.37 -31%	1.91 -6%	1.71 6%
Load Average *	5.84	4.73 19%	6.67 -14%	3.09 47%	7.4 -27%	6.7 -15%
Load Maximum *	9.12	7.16 21%	10.98 -20%	5.35 41%	9.71 -6%	9.18 -1%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime


WiFi Websurfing (Chrome 55)		11h 03min

	Xiaomi Mi 5s 3200 mAh	Samsung Galaxy S7 3000 mAh	OnePlus 3T 3400 mAh	Huawei P9 3000 mAh	HTC 10 3000 mAh	Xiaomi Mi 5 3000 mAh
Battery Runtime
WiFi v1.3	663	456 -31%	494 -25%	569 -14%	413 -38%	504 -24%

Pros

+ 良好性价比

+ 坚固金属外壳

+ 双SIM功能

+ USB-OTG，Miracast和NFC

+ 精确的传感器和良好的触摸屏

+ MIUI 8.0具有许多附加功能

+ 优秀的相机

+ 非常明亮而锐利的显示效果

+ 强大的整体性能

+ 电池续航长

Cons

- 没有LTE频带20

- 没有附送耳机

- 在长时间负载下会节流

- 扬声器听起来很小声

In Review: Xiaomi Mi 5s. Test model courtesy of TradingShenzhen

小米Mi 5s在许多方面令人印象深刻。在功能方面没有太多妥协：Mi 5s支持双SIM卡，屏幕非常明亮，用户界面MIUI 8. 0提供了大量的附加功能。除了良好的性能，该机在我们实际局域网测试中的续航时间也长。它主要的缺点是：小米忽略了去适应欧洲市场。Global ROM可以弥补一些缺点，但这仍然是一个遗憾——Mi 5s不支持常用的LTE 频带20。一些感兴趣的用户也可能不敢购买，因为该智能手机需要进口。