摩托罗拉Moto G Pro智能手机评测:廉价手写笔
Competing Devices
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Drive | Size | Resolution | Price |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
77.2 % v7 (old) | 10 / 2020 | Motorola Moto G Pro SD 665, Adreno 610 | 192 g | 128 GB eMMC Flash | 6.40" | 2300x1080 | |
79.3 % v7 (old) | 11 / 2019 | Xiaomi Redmi Note 8T SD 665, Adreno 610 | 200 g | 64 GB eMMC Flash | 6.30" | 2340x1080 | |
78.1 % v7 (old) | 05 / 2020 | Motorola Moto G8 Power SD 665, Adreno 610 | 197 g | 64 GB eMMC Flash | 6.40" | 2300x1080 | |
82.8 % v7 (old) | 02 / 2020 | Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite Exynos 9810, Mali-G72 MP18 | 199 g | 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash | 6.70" | 2400x1080 | |
80.3 % v6 (old) | 07 / 2018 | LG Q Stylus MT6750S, Mali-T860 MP2 | 172 g | 32 GB eMMC Flash | 6.20" | 2160x1080 |
» 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
Networking | |
iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite | |
Motorola Moto G Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8T | |
Motorola Moto G8 Power | |
LG Q Stylus | |
iperf3 receive AX12 | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite | |
Motorola Moto G Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8T | |
LG Q Stylus | |
Motorola Moto G8 Power |
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.
Daylight scene 1Daylight scene 2Low-light environment
|
Brightness Distribution: 97 %
Center on Battery: 735 cd/m²
Contrast: 1470:1 (Black: 0.5 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.84 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 5.9 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
92.3% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.342
Motorola Moto G Pro IPS, 2300x1080, 6.4" | Xiaomi Redmi Note 8T IPS, 2340x1080, 6.3" | Motorola Moto G8 Power IPS, 2300x1080, 6.4" | Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.7" | LG Q Stylus IPS, 2160x1080, 6.2" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | 11% | -19% | -16% | -7% | |
Brightness middle | 735 | 628 -15% | 462 -37% | 510 -31% | 458 -38% |
Brightness | 732 | 631 -14% | 483 -34% | 536 -27% | 441 -40% |
Brightness Distribution | 97 | 93 -4% | 93 -4% | 91 -6% | 94 -3% |
Black Level * | 0.5 | 0.54 -8% | 0.65 -30% | 0.51 -2% | |
Contrast | 1470 | 1163 -21% | 711 -52% | 898 -39% | |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5.84 | 2 66% | 5.7 2% | 6.6 -13% | 4.5 23% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 10.2 | 5.1 50% | 8.9 13% | 17.56 -72% | 7.1 30% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 5.9 | 3.7 37% | 6.5 -10% | 2.9 51% | 5.1 14% |
Gamma | 2.342 94% | 2.17 101% | 2.303 96% | 2.242 98% | 2.33 94% |
CCT | 7897 82% | 6230 104% | 8073 81% | 6989 93% | 7381 88% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 59.5 Hz | ≤ 15 % brightness setting | |
The display backlight flickers at 59.5 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 15 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 59.5 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8706 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
20 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 9 ms rise | |
↘ 11 ms fall | ||
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 40 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
42 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 19 ms rise | |
↘ 23 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. » 64 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). |
PCMark for Android | |
Work performance score (sort by value) | |
Motorola Moto G Pro | |
Motorola Moto G8 Power | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite | |
LG Q Stylus | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (7437 - 9051, n=10) | |
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value) | |
Motorola Moto G Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8T | |
Motorola Moto G8 Power | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (6189 - 11432, n=12) |
GFXBench 3.1 | |
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value) | |
Motorola Moto G Pro | |
Motorola Moto G8 Power | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite | |
LG Q Stylus | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (10 - 27, n=10) | |
Average of class Smartphone (3.7 - 166, n=173, last 2 years) | |
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Motorola Moto G Pro | |
Motorola Moto G8 Power | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite | |
LG Q Stylus | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (13 - 13, n=10) | |
Average of class Smartphone (8.3 - 365, n=173, last 2 years) |
AnTuTu v8 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Motorola Moto G Pro | |
Motorola Moto G8 Power | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (167305 - 181432, n=9) |
Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=169, last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite (Chrome 80) | |
Motorola Moto G Pro (Chrome 83.0.4103.106) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (22.9 - 31.2, n=6) |
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite (Chrome 80) | |
Motorola Moto G Pro (Chrome 83.0.4103.106) | |
Motorola Moto G8 Power (Chrome 80) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (33.4 - 51, n=8) | |
LG Q Stylus (hrome 69) |
Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=152, last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite (Chome 80) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (25.4 - 30.8, n=6) | |
Motorola Moto G Pro (Chrome 83.0.4103.106) |
WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite (Chrome 80) | |
Motorola Moto G8 Power (Chrome 80) | |
Motorola Moto G Pro (Chrome 83.0.4103.106) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (38 - 58, n=9) | |
LG Q Stylus (Chrome 69) |
Octane V2 - Total Score | |
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=210, last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite (Chrome 80) | |
Motorola Moto G Pro (Chrome 83.0.4103.106) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (6133 - 9671, n=9) | |
Motorola Moto G8 Power (Chrome 80) | |
LG Q Stylus (hrome 69) |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
LG Q Stylus (hrome 69) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (4434 - 6719, n=9) | |
Motorola Moto G8 Power (Chrome 80) | |
Motorola Moto G Pro (Chrome 83.0.4103.106) | |
Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite (Chrome 80) | |
Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=167, last 2 years) |
* ... smaller is better
Motorola Moto G Pro | Xiaomi Redmi Note 8T | Motorola Moto G8 Power | Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite | LG Q Stylus | Average 128 GB eMMC Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AndroBench 3-5 | 2% | 0% | 52% | -30% | -3% | 412% | |
Sequential Read 256KB | 294.1 | 315.8 7% | 300.9 2% | 777 164% | 241.7 -18% | 284 ? -3% | 1894 ? 544% |
Sequential Write 256KB | 233.6 | 173.9 -26% | 181.9 -22% | 190.8 -18% | 121.4 -48% | 194.6 ? -17% | 1476 ? 532% |
Random Read 4KB | 65.5 | 90.4 38% | 57.7 -12% | 132 102% | 31.45 -52% | 82.7 ? 26% | 278 ? 324% |
Random Write 4KB | 89.4 | 91.2 2% | 132.6 48% | 142 59% | 12.07 -86% | 55.4 ? -38% | 312 ? 249% |
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 73.4 ? | 71.6 ? -2% | 69.4 ? -5% | 73.5 ? 0% | 83.1 ? 13% | 78.1 ? 6% | |
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 55.9 ? | 52.8 ? -6% | 49.7 ? -11% | 59.8 ? 7% | 63.5 ? 14% | 61.8 ? 11% |
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 43.9 °C / 111 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 44.1 °C / 111 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.7 °C / 82 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Motorola Moto G Pro audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 67.2% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 67.2% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 67.2% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (118.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 87% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 4% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 96% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 1% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Motorola Moto G8 Power audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 73.8% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 73.8% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 73.8% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (125.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 95% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 1% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 99% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 0% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Off / Standby | 0 / 0.1 Watt |
Idle | 1.6 / 2.3 / 2.8 Watt |
Load |
4.2 / 6.9 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Motorola Moto G Pro 4000 mAh | Xiaomi Redmi Note 8T 4000 mAh | Motorola Moto G8 Power 5000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite 4500 mAh | LG Q Stylus 3300 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | 30% | 30% | -9% | 34% | 17% | 4% | |
Idle Minimum * | 1.6 | 0.62 61% | 0.9 44% | 0.9 44% | 0.69 57% | 1.017 ? 36% | 0.883 ? 45% |
Idle Average * | 2.3 | 1.77 23% | 1.3 43% | 1.6 30% | 1.7 26% | 1.893 ? 18% | 1.467 ? 36% |
Idle Maximum * | 2.8 | 1.8 36% | 1.6 43% | 1.9 32% | 1.73 38% | 2.36 ? 16% | 1.621 ? 42% |
Load Average * | 4.2 | 3.42 19% | 3.2 24% | 8.4 -100% | 3.21 24% | 3.77 ? 10% | 6.58 ? -57% |
Load Maximum * | 6.9 | 6.14 11% | 7.1 -3% | 10.3 -49% | 5.31 23% | 6.66 ? 3% | 9.91 ? -44% |
* ... smaller is better
Motorola Moto G Pro 4000 mAh | Xiaomi Redmi Note 8T 4000 mAh | Motorola Moto G8 Power 5000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Note10 Lite 4500 mAh | LG Q Stylus 3300 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | -4% | 27% | 5% | -39% | |
Reader / Idle | 2450 | 2205 -10% | 1529 -38% | ||
H.264 | 882 | 1071 21% | 527 -40% | ||
WiFi v1.3 | 792 | 764 -4% | 1002 27% | 904 14% | 419 -47% |
Load | 290 | 274 -6% | 200 -31% |
Pros
Cons
总结——Moto G Pro是个应该被重视的手机:
一款廉价的带有触控笔的智能手机-借助Moto G Pro,摩托罗拉填补了这一空白,并成为三星Galaxy Note系列的重要竞争对手。
只需330欧元(约合390美元),买家就可以得到配备了手写笔的设备精良的中档智能手机,即使它不能完全媲美三星的手写笔,也非常适合日常使用。
如果您正在寻找带有触控笔的廉价智能手机,那么摩托罗拉Moto G Pro绝对值得考虑。
我们对触控笔的唯一抱怨与手机的名称有关-“ Moto G Pro”丝毫不暗示智能手机的用户会受益于触控笔输入所提供的优势。尽管有趣的是,美国版的Moto G Pro被称为“ Moto G Stylus”,但其在功能方便做得很糟糕:既没有双SIM卡也没有NFC支持,还仅配备10瓦充电器。
回到Moto G Pro:除了触控笔和上述其他优点外,杜比扬声器,明亮的IPS显示屏,优质的摄像头和快速的Wi-Fi等功能进一步增强了用户体验。作为Android One设备,可以保证在未来两年内收到软件更新。
Motorola Moto G Pro
- 07/14/2020 v7 (old)
Manuel Masiero