Nokia 5.3智能手机评测：简版安卓手机

Name: Nokia 5.3
Brand: Nokia

一圈相机。

诺基亚5.3提供了一个四摄像头，一个大显示屏和一个持久的电池，价格相对较低。但是，它的价格范围内竞争激烈。

Florian Schmitt, 👁 Florian Schmitt (translated by Zewei Shen), Published 07/05/2020 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

Android ARM Smartphone

Test device courtesy of Nokia Deutschland

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Nokia 5.3 (5 Series)

Processor

Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 8 x 2.2 GHz, Kryo 260

Graphics adapter

Qualcomm Adreno 610

Memory

4 GB

Display

6.55 inch 20:9, 1600 x 720 pixel 268 PPI, Capacitive, IPS, 60 Hz

Storage

64 GB eMMC Flash, 64 GB

, 48 GB free

Connections

1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5mm, Card Reader: 最大512 GB的microSD，专用, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: 加速度传感器，接近传感器

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), 3G (B1/B2/B5/B8), 4G (B1/B3/B5/B7/B8/B20/B28/B38/B40/B41), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS

Size

height x width x depth (in mm): 8.5 x 164.3 x 76.6

Battery

4000 mAh Lithium-Polymer

Operating System

Android 10

Camera

Primary Camera: 13 MPix f / 1.8，相位比较自动对焦，LED闪光灯，视频@ 1080p / 30fps（相机1）; 5.0MP，广角镜（相机2）; 2.0MP，微距镜头（3号相机）; 2.0MP，景深（相机4）
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix f/2.0

Additional features

Speakers: 下边缘为单声道扬声器, Keyboard: 虚拟, 充电器，USB电缆，耳机，SIM卡工具, 24 Months Warranty, LTE Cat 4（150Mbps / 50Mbps）; UKW-无线电, fanless

Weight

185 g, Power Supply: 63 g

Price

199 Euro

Links

Nokia homepage

Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

see all specifications

Vergleichsgeräte

Bewertung	Rating Version	Datum	Modell	Gewicht	Laufwerk	Groesse	Aufloesung
75.7 % v7 ^(old)	v7 ^(old)	07 / 2020	Nokia 5.3 SD 665, Adreno 610	185 g	64 GB eMMC Flash	6.55"	1600x720
80.7 % v7 ^(old)	v7 ^(old)	06 / 2020	Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S SD 720G, Adreno 618	209 g	128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash	6.67"	2400x1080
76.7 % v7 ^(old)	v7 ^(old)	08 / 2020	Huawei P smart Pro Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4	206 g	128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	6.59"	2340x1080
78.4 % v7 ^(old)	v7 ^(old)	11 / 2019	Motorola Moto G8 Plus SD 665, Adreno 610	188 g	64 GB eMMC Flash	6.30"	2280x1080

Size comparison

Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Nokia 5.3 Huawei P smart Pro Motorola Moto G8 Plus DIN A6 ❌

Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	256 (247^min - 263^max) MBit/s +57%
Nokia 5.3 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	163 (25^min - 258^max) MBit/s
Motorola Moto G8 Plus 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	152 (1^min - 254^max) MBit/s -7%
Huawei P smart Pro 802.11 b/g/n	51.5 (19^min - 90^max) MBit/s -68%
iperf3 receive AX12
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	286 (225^min - 321^max) MBit/s +97%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	182 (11^min - 259^max) MBit/s +26%
Nokia 5.3 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac	145 (20^min - 215^max) MBit/s
Huawei P smart Pro 802.11 b/g/n	42.4 MBit/s -71%

Nokia 5.3; iperf3 receive AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø145.2 (20-215)

Nokia 5.3; iperf3 transmit AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø162.6 (25-258)

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

Nokia 5.3

Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

OnePlus 8T

Olympus E-M10 II

click to load images

Nokia 5.3

Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

OnePlus 8T

Olympus E-M10 II

click to load images

Nokia 5.3

Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

OnePlus 8T

Olympus E-M10 II

ColorChecker Nokia 5.3: 10.95 ∆E min: 3.33 - max: 21.07 ∆E


477 cd/m²	479 cd/m²	491 cd/m²
488 cd/m²	523 cd/m²	497 cd/m²
468 cd/m²	450 cd/m²	469 cd/m²

Distribution of brightness

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2

Maximum: 523 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 482.4 cd/m² Minimum: 4.58 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 86 %
Center on Battery: 523 cd/m²
Contrast: 1137:1 (Black: 0.46 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.22 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 8 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
94.4% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.226

	Nokia 5.3 IPS, 1600x720, 6.6"	Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S IPS, 2400x1080, 6.7"	Huawei P smart Pro TFT-LCD (LTPS), 2340x1080, 6.6"	Motorola Moto G8 Plus IPS, 2280x1080, 6.3"
Response Times		21%	8%	28%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *	56 ?(28, 28)	44 ?(21, 23) 21%	51.2 ?(21.2, 30) 9%	36 ?(17, 19) 36%
Response Time Black / White *	30 ?(15, 15)	24 ?(9, 15) 20%	28 ?(10, 18) 7%	24 ?(9, 15) 20%
PWM Frequency				463 ?(20)
Screen		18%	-3%	11%
Brightness middle	523	622 19%	480 -8%	597 14%
Brightness	482	612 27%	459 -5%	596 24%
Brightness Distribution	86	94 9%	87 1%	93 8%
Black Level *	0.46	0.56 -22%	0.47 -2%	0.52 -13%
Contrast	1137	1111 -2%	1021 -10%	1148 1%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	6.22	3.98 36%	5.7 8%	5.93 5%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	10.56	7.33 31%	11.3 -7%	9.42 11%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	8	4.5 44%	7.8 2%	5.3 34%
Gamma	2.226 ^99%	2.206 ^100%	2.27 ^97%	2.232 ^99%
CCT	8856 ^73%	7361 ^88%	8813 ^74%	7632 ^85%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)		114.9
Total Average (Program / Settings)		20% / 18%	3% / -1%	20% / 14%

* ... smaller is better

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
30 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 15 ms rise
30 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 15 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. » 78 % 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
56 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 28 ms rise
56 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 28 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. » 92 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms).

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 not detected

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8710 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

Geekbench 5.5 | PCMark for Android | 3DMark | GFXBench

Geekbench 5.5
Single-Core (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	312 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	559 Points +79%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	330 Points +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (309 - 314, n=8)	311 Points 0%
Average of class Smartphone (126 - 2437, n=176, last 2 years)	1037 Points +232%
Multi-Core (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	1350 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	1690 Points +25%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	1356 Points 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (1256 - 1421, n=8)	1356 Points 0%
Average of class Smartphone (473 - 8816, n=176, last 2 years)	3464 Points +157%

PCMark for Android
Work performance score (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	8538 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	9027 Points +6%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	9854 Points +15%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	8186 Points -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (7437 - 9051, n=10)	8163 Points -4%
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	6775 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	7673 Points +13%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	6993 Points +3%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	6534 Points -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (6189 - 11432, n=12)	6985 Points +3%

3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	24065 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	38671 Points +61%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	21876 Points -9%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	23253 Points -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (22445 - 25046, n=11)	23846 Points -1%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	15403 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	52700 Points +242%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	2177 Points -86%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	24992 Points +62%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (15403 - 25351, n=11)	24085 Points +56%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	20320 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	20019 Points -1%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	22398 Points +10%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	18698 Points -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (17865 - 24652, n=11)	20749 Points +2%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	1795 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	3501 Points +95%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	1489 Points -17%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	1765 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (1675 - 1795, n=12)	1751 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone (812 - 7285, n=26, last 2 years)	4204 Points +134%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	1663 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	3647 Points +119%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	1335 Points -20%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	1634 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (1564 - 1663, n=12)	1623 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone (756 - 9451, n=26, last 2 years)	4740 Points +185%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	2482 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	3070 Points +24%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	2487 Points 0%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	2452 Points -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (2282 - 2596, n=12)	2427 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone (1093 - 4349, n=26, last 2 years)	3303 Points +33%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	1810 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	3669 Points +103%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	1508 Points -17%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	1790 Points -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (1754 - 1810, n=12)	1787 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone (883 - 23024, n=73, last 2 years)	11109 Points +514%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	1692 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	3803 Points +125%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	1342 Points -21%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	1670 Points -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (1650 - 1692, n=12)	1669 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone (840 - 45492, n=73, last 2 years)	19708 Points +1065%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	2396 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	3267 Points +36%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	2496 Points +4%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	2393 Points 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (2199 - 2503, n=12)	2369 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone (1075 - 8749, n=73, last 2 years)	5001 Points +109%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	1152 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	2507 Points +118%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	999 Points -13%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	1128 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (1076 - 1152, n=12)	1119 Points -3%
Average of class Smartphone (286 - 17553, n=70, last 2 years)	3006 Points +161%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	999 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	2369 Points +137%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	845 Points -15%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	979 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (927 - 999, n=12)	970 Points -3%
Average of class Smartphone (240 - 29890, n=70, last 2 years)	3166 Points +217%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	2476 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	3152 Points +27%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	2456 Points -1%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	2424 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (2212 - 2580, n=12)	2418 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone (858 - 7180, n=70, last 2 years)	3260 Points +32%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	1148 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	2680 Points +133%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	991 Points -14%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	1126 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (1097 - 1151, n=11)	1135 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone (317 - 23762, n=164, last 2 years)	8210 Points +615%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	999 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	2551 Points +155%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	875 Points -12%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	981 Points -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (980 - 999, n=11)	988 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone (267 - 40163, n=164, last 2 years)	12348 Points +1136%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	2409 Points
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	3256 Points +35%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	2478 Points +3%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	2341 Points -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (2154 - 2541, n=11)	2377 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone (877 - 10632, n=164, last 2 years)	4746 Points +97%

GFXBench
on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	14 fps
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	17 fps +21%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	6.1 fps -56%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	7.6 fps -46%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (6.2 - 15, n=12)	9.14 fps -35%
Average of class Smartphone (3.6 - 166, n=207, last 2 years)	50.7 fps +262%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	8.3 fps
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	7 fps -16%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	8.2 fps -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (7.8 - 8.4, n=12)	8.13 fps -2%
Average of class Smartphone (2.3 - 321, n=207, last 2 years)	84.9 fps +923%
on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	8.8 fps
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	11 fps +25%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	2.3 fps -74%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	4.5 fps -49%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (3.9 - 9.1, n=12)	5.53 fps -37%
Average of class Smartphone (0.85 - 144, n=207, last 2 years)	38.9 fps +342%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 5.3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	2.8 fps
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G, Adreno 618, 6144	7 fps +150%
Huawei P smart Pro HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 6144	4 fps +43%
Motorola Moto G8 Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 4096	2.8 fps 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 (2.7 - 2.8, n=12)	2.78 fps -1%
Average of class Smartphone (0.85 - 129, n=207, last 2 years)	34 fps +1114%

	Nokia 5.3	Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S	Huawei P smart Pro	Motorola Moto G8 Plus	Average 64 GB eMMC Flash	Average of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5		40%	76%	17%	-19%	445%
Sequential Read 256KB	299.5	496.6 66%	822 174%	302.5 1%	274 ?(95.6 - 704, n=204) -9%	1887 ?(226 - 4512, n=198, last 2 years) 530%
Sequential Write 256KB	243.2	214.8 -12%	195.4 -20%	217.4 -11%	176.6 ?(40 - 274, n=204) -27%	1471 ?(57.5 - 3908, n=198, last 2 years) 505%
Random Read 4KB	109.1	137 26%	154.3 41%	59.9 -45%	59.4 ?(9.58 - 148.5, n=204) -46%	278 ?(22.2 - 483, n=198, last 2 years) 155%
Random Write 4KB	45.2	123.6 173%	156.3 246%	124.9 176%	32.2 ?(2.34 - 146.9, n=204) -29%	311 ?(9.4 - 753, n=198, last 2 years) 588%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard	77.3 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)	74.5 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) -4%	76.5 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) -1%	72.6 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) -6%	77.4 ?(21.1 - 107.6, n=144) 0%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard	60.7 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)	54.9 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) -10%	69 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) 14%	52.2 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501) -14%	58.3 ?(11.2 - 83.3, n=144) -4%

Max. Load

Idle


51.7 °C	46.7 °C	41.9 °C
50.3 °C	44.4 °C	42 °C
48.7 °C	44.8 °C	42 °C

Maximum: 51.7 °C
Average: 45.8 °C


39.9 °C	45.9 °C	51.1 °C
40.5 °C	46.1 °C	49.9 °C
41.4 °C	46.2 °C	50.7 °C

Maximum: 51.1 °C
Average: 45.7 °C

Power Supply (max.) 42.6 °C | Room Temperature 21.2 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-260

(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 45.8 °C / 114 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 51.7 °C / 125 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 51.1 °C / 124 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 33.5 °C / 92 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.

Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)

Nokia 5.3 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (76.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.9% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (30.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 76% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 20% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 87% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 10% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 64.7% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 64.7% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 64.7% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (119.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 87% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 3% 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%

	Nokia 5.3 4000 mAh	Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S 5020 mAh	Huawei P smart Pro 4000 mAh	Motorola Moto G8 Plus 4000 mAh	Average of class Smartphone
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing	876	1187 36%	757 -14%	980 12%	991 ?(476 - 3244, n=209, last 2 years) 13%

Battery Runtime


WiFi Websurfing		14h 36min

Pros

+ 相对轻薄

+ 最新软件

+ 续航时间长

+ 专用microSD读取器

+ 多功能的摄像系统...

Cons

- ...成像质量一半

- 负载下过热

- 仅eMMC闪存

- WLAN性能波动

- 屏幕上蓝光严重

总结——给的太少：

In review: Nokia 5.3 test device provided by Nokia Germany.

诺基亚5.3看起来有点过时了。放在去年，相对较大的电池，灵活的摄像头系统和同等水平的性能还能一战。然而，在2020年，在这个价位，与竞争对手相比，这太少了，并甚至有些落后，即使只卖200欧元，我们也很难原谅：

即使在室温下，在较长的负载下温度也太高。 WLAN数据速率不断变化，LTE速度缓慢。到2020年，屏幕上仍然有很严重的蓝光。

诺基亚5.3有一些缺点，因此大大落后于价格昂贵的竞争对手。

当然，诺基亚5.3相当轻薄，它提供合理的续航时间，并且功能强大，足以满足日常使用的需求。安卓是最新版本，在接下来的两年中，借助Android One，您可以安全地进行更新。但是，由于相机整体上很难让人信服，而且其他制造商提供了这么多更好的产品，因此我们很难为诺基亚手机提出推荐。

充其量，如果它以低得多的价格在去年上市，那么这款手机可能适合于需求不高的用户。

Nokia 5.3 - 07/02/2020 v7 ^(old)
Florian Schmitt

Chassis

76%

Keyboard

65 / 75 → 87%

Pointing Device

94%

Connectivity

43 / 70 → 62%

Weight

89%

Battery

90%

Display

82%

Games Performance

15 / 64 → 23%

Application Performance

64 / 86 → 75%

Temperature

78%

Noise

100%

Audio

62 / 90 → 69%

Camera

44%

Average

70%

76%

Smartphone - Weighted Average

Price comparison

Editor of the original article: Ninh Ngoc Duy - Editorial Assistant - 470341 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2008

contact me via: Facebook

Please share our article, every link counts!

> Notebookcheck中文版（NBC中国） > 评测 > Nokia 5.3智能手机评测：简版安卓手机

Florian Schmitt, 2020-07- 5 (Update: 2020-07- 5)

Vergleichsgeräte

Size comparison

Display Response Times

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

Nokia 5.3 audio analysis

Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S audio analysis

Pros

Cons

总结——给的太少：

More articles related to this device

Price comparison