红米Note 9智能手机评测:有着6400万四摄的红米9
Comparison devices
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Drive | Size | Resolution | Price |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
79.9 % v7 (old) | 01 / 2021 | Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 Helio G85, Mali-G52 MP2 | 199 g | 64 GB eMMC Flash | 6.53" | 2340x1080 | |
77.8 % v7 (old) | 06 / 2020 | Xiaomi Redmi 9 Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2 | 198 g | 32 GB eMMC Flash | 6.53" | 2340x1080 | |
80.7 % v7 (old) | 06 / 2020 | Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S SD 720G, Adreno 618 | 209 g | 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash | 6.67" | 2400x1080 | |
76.4 % v7 (old) | 06 / 2020 | Samsung Galaxy A21s Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1 | 192 g | 32 GB eMMC Flash | 6.50" | 1600x720 | |
78.2 % v7 (old) | 06 / 2020 | Realme 6i Helio G80, Mali-G52 MP2 | 199 g | 128 GB eMMC Flash | 6.50" | 1600x720 | |
75.1 % v7 (old) | 06 / 2020 | Sony Xperia L4 Helio P22 MT6762, PowerVR GE8320 | 178 g | 64 GB eMMC Flash | 6.20" | 1680x720 |
» 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
Size Comparison
Networking | |
iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
Xiaomi Redmi 9 | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 | |
Samsung Galaxy A21s | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S | |
Sony Xperia L4 | |
Realme 6i | |
iperf3 receive AX12 | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 | |
Samsung Galaxy A21s | |
Xiaomi Redmi 9 | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S | |
Sony Xperia L4 | |
Realme 6i |
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.
Wide angleLow light5x ZoomUltra wide angleWide angle
|
Brightness Distribution: 89 %
Center on Battery: 553 cd/m²
Contrast: 4608:1 (Black: 0.12 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.8 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 2.2 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
97.7% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.3
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 IPS LCD, 2340x1080, 6.5" | Xiaomi Redmi 9 IPS LCD, 2340x1080, 6.5" | Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S IPS, 2400x1080, 6.7" | Samsung Galaxy A21s PLS, 1600x720, 6.5" | Realme 6i IPS, 1600x720, 6.5" | Sony Xperia L4 IPS, 1680x720, 6.2" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | -68% | -63% | -71% | -62% | -63% | |
Brightness middle | 553 | 476 -14% | 622 12% | 540 -2% | 518 -6% | 429 -22% |
Brightness | 527 | 436 -17% | 612 16% | 509 -3% | 484 -8% | 404 -23% |
Brightness Distribution | 89 | 86 -3% | 94 6% | 91 2% | 89 0% | 92 3% |
Black Level * | 0.12 | 0.67 -458% | 0.56 -367% | 0.36 -200% | 0.26 -117% | 0.26 -117% |
Contrast | 4608 | 710 -85% | 1111 -76% | 1500 -67% | 1992 -57% | 1650 -64% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 3.8 | 3.51 8% | 3.98 -5% | 6.58 -73% | 5.8 -53% | 6.14 -62% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 8.7 | 9.38 -8% | 7.33 16% | 11.55 -33% | 11 -26% | 10.51 -21% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.2 | 1.5 32% | 4.5 -105% | 6.4 -191% | 7.3 -232% | 6.6 -200% |
Gamma | 2.3 96% | 2.166 102% | 2.206 100% | 2.206 100% | 2.23 99% | 2.23 99% |
CCT | 6727 97% | 6485 100% | 7361 88% | 8482 77% | 8037 81% | 8346 78% |
Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 114.9 |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
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 8743 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
25.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 12.4 ms rise | |
↘ 13.2 ms fall | ||
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 58 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
38.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 19.6 ms rise | |
↘ 19.2 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. » 55 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms). |
Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=161, last 2 years) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S (Chrome 81) | |
Average Mediatek Helio G85 (29.2 - 52.8, n=6) | |
Xiaomi Redmi 9 (Chrome 85) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 (Chrome 85) | |
Realme 6i (Chrome 81) | |
Samsung Galaxy A21s (Chrome 84) |
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S (Chrome 81) | |
Average Mediatek Helio G85 (53.9 - 58.9, n=4) | |
Realme 6i (Chrome 81) | |
Xiaomi Redmi 9 (Chrome 85) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 (Chrome 85) | |
Samsung Galaxy A21s (Chrome 84) |
Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=146, last 2 years) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S (Chome 81) | |
Average Mediatek Helio G85 (27 - 40.6, n=5) | |
Xiaomi Redmi 9 (Chrome 85) | |
Realme 6i (Chrome 81) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 (Chrome 85) | |
Samsung Galaxy A21s (Chome 84) |
WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S (Chrome 81) | |
Average Mediatek Helio G85 (43 - 47, n=5) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 (Chrome 85) | |
Xiaomi Redmi 9 | |
Realme 6i (Chrome 81) | |
Samsung Galaxy A21s (Chrome 84) |
Octane V2 - Total Score | |
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=203, last 2 years) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S (Chrome 81) | |
Average Mediatek Helio G85 (10299 - 15430, n=12) | |
Realme 6i (Chrome 81) | |
Xiaomi Redmi 9 (Chrome 85) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 (Chrome 85) | |
Samsung Galaxy A21s (Chrome 84) |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
Samsung Galaxy A21s (Chrome 84) | |
Xiaomi Redmi 9 (Chrome 85) | |
Realme 6i (Chrome 81) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 (Chrome 85) | |
Average Mediatek Helio G85 (2967 - 3939, n=6) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S (Chrome 81) | |
Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=160, last 2 years) |
* ... smaller is better
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 | Xiaomi Redmi 9 | Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S | Samsung Galaxy A21s | Realme 6i | Sony Xperia L4 | Average 64 GB eMMC Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AndroBench 3-5 | -23% | 20% | -13% | 4% | -22% | -24% | 352% | |
Sequential Read 256KB | 306.6 | 289.9 -5% | 496.6 62% | 307 0% | 309.5 1% | 293.4 -4% | 274 ? -11% | 1839 ? 500% |
Sequential Write 256KB | 248.1 | 119.8 -52% | 214.8 -13% | 104.3 -58% | 256.4 3% | 165 -33% | 176.2 ? -29% | 1425 ? 474% |
Random Read 4KB | 65.1 | 49.09 -25% | 137 110% | 77.2 19% | 73.5 13% | 61.2 -6% | 59.4 ? -9% | 277 ? 325% |
Random Write 4KB | 146.9 | 60.7 -59% | 123.6 -16% | 89.5 -39% | 150.9 3% | 22.5 -85% | 32 ? -78% | 309 ? 110% |
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 84.4 ? | 84.4 ? 0% | 74.5 ? -12% | 80 ? -5% | 84.6 ? 0% | 83.5 ? -1% | 77.4 ? -8% | |
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 63.5 ? | 65 ? 2% | 54.9 ? -14% | 66.4 ? 5% | 64.5 ? 2% | 62.5 ? -2% | 58.3 ? -8% |
PUBG mobile
Real Racing 3
Dead Trigger 2
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 35.8 °C / 96 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.2 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 34.4 °C / 94 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.5 °C / 85 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (92.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.8% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (4.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.2% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 8% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 86% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 28% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 65% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Samsung Galaxy A21s audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (79.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 62.2% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 62.2% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 62.2% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (128.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 98% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 0% 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 | 0.02 / 0.23 Watt |
Idle | 0.74 / 2.17 / 2.2 Watt |
Load |
4.17 / 6.11 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 5020 mAh | Xiaomi Redmi 9 5020 mAh | Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S 5020 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A21s 5000 mAh | Realme 6i 5000 mAh | Sony Xperia L4 3580 mAh | Average Mediatek Helio G85 | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -28% | -32% | -30% | 23% | -3% | -15% | ||
Idle Minimum * | 0.74 | 1.4 -89% | 1.5 -103% | 1.5 -103% | 0.37 50% | 0.957 ? -29% | 0.894 ? -21% | |
Idle Average * | 2.17 | 1.7 22% | 2.1 3% | 2.1 3% | 1.62 25% | 1.628 ? 25% | 1.456 ? 33% | |
Idle Maximum * | 2.2 | 2.1 5% | 2.5 -14% | 2.9 -32% | 1.69 23% | 2 ? 9% | 1.616 ? 27% | |
Load Average * | 4.17 | 5.7 -37% | 5.2 -25% | 4.6 -10% | 3.61 13% | 4.35 ? -4% | 6.45 ? -55% | |
Load Maximum * | 6.11 | 8.5 -39% | 7.5 -23% | 6.6 -8% | 5.9 3% | 6.95 ? -14% | 9.8 ? -60% |
* ... smaller is better
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9 5020 mAh | Xiaomi Redmi 9 5020 mAh | Xiaomi Redmi Note 9S 5020 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A21s 5000 mAh | Realme 6i 5000 mAh | Sony Xperia L4 3580 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | -2% | 10% | -4% | 52% | -10% | |
Reader / Idle | 2294 | 2337 2% | 2263 -1% | 2009 -12% | ||
H.264 | 1116 | 1171 5% | 1269 14% | 1087 -3% | ||
WiFi v1.3 | 867 | 804 -7% | 1187 37% | 943 9% | 1318 52% | 783 -10% |
Load | 314 | 289 -8% | 279 -11% | 287 -9% |
Pros
Cons
总结——智能手机世界不错的入门产品:
小米在其价格合理的中端智能手机上声称:“您需要的一切”。来自深圳的中国制造商的广告口号并不完全错误,因为Redmi Note 9以约150欧元(〜178美元)的市价提供了非常好的智能手机体验-但是,我们明确建议多花20欧元(〜售价为$ 24美元)即可获得4 GB版本。
当寻找价格低于200欧元(〜237美元)的廉价智能手机时,您绝对应该考虑Redmi Note 9。
与Redmi 9相比,Note机型使用了更好的扬声器和更好的主摄像头。明亮的IPS面板具有明显的对比度和更稳定的视角,带来了明显的优势,尤其是在日常操作中。此外,Note 9默认包括快速充电器。
但是,Redmi Note 9仍然是并且仍然是入门级智能手机。因此,您必须在处理器的选择,摄像头(尤其是超广角摄像头)的质量以及存储和WLAN速度方面做出一些折衷。
Xiaomi Redmi Note 9
- 09/16/2020 v7 (old)
Marcus Herbrich