谷歌Pixel 6 Pro评测--带香草味的眼球糖Android
谷歌的Pixel 6 Pro是 Pixel 6 ,是装备更好的竞争者。它拥有更大的显示屏,分辨率和刷新率都更高,电池更大,内存也更大。相机设置乍一看非常相似,但与Pixel 6不同的是,Pixel 6 Pro配备了光学变焦。
在欧洲,该设备有两种配置,一种是128GB的,一种是256GB的,起价分别为899美元和999美元。美国客户还可以选择512GB存储空间,价格为100美元。
潜在的竞争对手比较
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Drive | Size | Resolution | Price |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
89.2 % v7 (old) | 04 / 2022 | Google Pixel 6 Pro Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20 | 210 g | 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 6.70" | 3120x1440 | |
88.9 % v7 (old) | 05 / 2022 | Samsung Galaxy S22+ Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920 | 196 g | 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 6.60" | 2340x1080 | |
87.6 % v7 (old) | 02 / 2022 | Xiaomi 12 Pro SD 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730 | 204 g | 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 6.73" | 3200x1440 | |
90.8 % v7 (old) | 10 / 2021 | Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15, A15 GPU 5-Core | 203 g | 256 GB NVMe | 6.10" | 2532x1170 | |
89.2 % v7 (old) | 04 / 2022 | Oppo Find X5 Pro SD 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730 | 221 g | 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 6.70" | 3216x1440 |
» 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
外壳--不比Pixel 6重多少
尽管谷歌Pixel 6 Pro拥有更大的显示屏和更大的电池,但它只是略大,而且比Pixel 6多出3克(0.1盎司)的重量。由于显示屏边框略窄,加上两侧的弧形玻璃,我们还发现显示屏与机身的比例提高到89%。
我们的评测单元的金属框架是抛光的,因此和覆盖在两侧的康宁大猩猩玻璃Victus一样容易受到指纹和污迹的影响。构建质量总体良好,缝隙均匀而狭窄,只有在翘起时才有轻微的吱吱声。
谷歌Pixel 6 Pro获得了IP68认证,可以防止灰尘和水的进入,有三种颜色可供选择。暴雨黑、阴天白和阳光色。
连接性 - 带有快速USB的Pixel 6 Pro
谷歌Pixel 6 Pro有一个快速的USB 3.2 Gen 1 USB端口,用于快速数据传输和USB OTG。不幸的是,它不支持有线显示输出。支持蓝牙5.2和NFC。
总的来说,Pixel 6 Pro沿袭了其前辈的极简主义做法。它缺乏对microSD存储扩展、通知LED、红外辐射器、FM广播接收器等的支持。
软件--更新周期长,包括Android 15
谷歌Pixel 6 Pro默认配备了Android 12,与Pixel 6,更新周期长,至少有三年的功能升级,外加两年的安全更新,共计五年。
6 Pro支持所有知名的Pixel功能,开箱后没有发现预装的第三方应用程序。
通信和GNSS - 带有Wi-Fi 6和VHT160的快速Wi-Fi
谷歌Pixel 6 Pro支持所有现代通信标准,包括蓝牙5.2、NFC和5G Sub6。
虽然理论上它的Wi-Fi调制解调器支持Wi-Fi 6E,但在实践中,它被证明是非常不稳定和不可靠的,当连接到我们的华硕ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000参考路由器时,经常出现信号丢失,这是谷歌需要解决的问题。由于对VHT160的支持,将我们自己限制在Wi-Fi 6是更可靠和极快的。
Networking | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Average of class Smartphone (34.8 - 1875, n=191, last 2 years) | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Average of class Smartphone (40.5 - 1810, n=193, last 2 years) | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
Average of class Smartphone (229 - 1945, n=80, last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Average of class Smartphone (668 - 1864, n=80, last 2 years) | |
iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
iperf3 receive AX12 | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro |
Pixel 6 Pro支持所有常见的定位服务,并设法在室内以高精确度获得卫星锁定。
在我们通常的自行车旅行中,我们将其准确性与Garmin Venu 2。事实证明,Pixel 6 Pro并不是特别准确,记录的轨迹和我们的实际位置之间有一些偏差。尽管如此,它仍然足以满足日常导航的需要。
电话和通话质量
在电话方面,谷歌Pixel 6 Pro与Pixel 6非常相似,通过一张Nano SIM卡和一张eSIM卡支持双卡。它既支持VoLTE,也支持Wi-Fi通话。
通话质量非常好,至少在使用该设备的耳机时是如此。语音传输清晰自然,在谈话的几秒钟内有良好的环境噪音消除。该设备的三个麦克风和软件算法在这方面做得很好。
然而,在扬声器上,我们发现Pixel 6 Pro的声音略显混浊和空洞,麦克风范围有些有限。
相机 - 改进的Pixel 6设置
目前这两款Pixel手机的摄像头设置非常相似。唯一的区别是Pixel 6 Pro的光学变焦和更高分辨率的前置摄像头。它还支持4K@30FPS或FHD@60FPS视频录制。
主摄像头和超广角镜头都与Pixel 6,你可以在我们的Pixel 6评测中找到关于这两个摄像头的更多细节。额外的4倍潜望式变焦可以实现20倍的总数字变焦,至少根据谷歌的说法。在现实中,小于8倍的变焦水平继续使用主镜头,只有在8倍以上才会转向潜望镜镜头。请记住,这只是在主要物体不超过3英尺远的情况下才是如此。
视频是以60 FPS的UHD格式记录的,变焦限制在7倍。然而,如果你降低FPS或视频分辨率,你也可以利用相机的全部变焦能力。
Pixel 6 Pro变焦(从左到右):2倍、4倍、10倍和20倍变焦
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.
HauptkameraHauptkameraUltraweitwinkel5-facher ZoomLow-Light配件和保修 - Pixel智能手机,不带充电器
谷歌Pixel 6 Pro配备了一条USB-C电缆,一个USB OTG加密狗(USB-C到A),以及一个SIM卡工具。兼容的有线或无线充电器需要单独购买。
与欧洲机型不同,在美国销售的设备仅有12个月的保修期,可选择延长保修期至两年,费用为199美元,或延长至三年,月费为9美元。
输入设备和处理 - 没有人脸检测
谷歌Pixel 6 Pro的电容式触摸屏工作无误,感觉非常流畅。它可以同时检测多达10个输入,而且总体上非常准确。内置的振动电机非常坚固和清晰。
该设备有一个屏内指纹识别器,虽然非常快,但不是特别准确和可靠。脸部检测是不可用的。
显示屏 - LTPO OLED,最高可达120赫兹
6.7英寸显示屏以原生QHD+分辨率运行,不能在软件中降低。此外,这个LTPO OLED显示屏支持在60和120赫兹之间的自适应刷新率切换。
照明非常均匀和一致,在我们的APL50测试中,显示屏在全白图像上达到了814尼特的峰值亮度,在均匀分布的黑色和白色瓷砖上达到了1,053尼特(中心)。在禁用环境光传感器的情况下,最大亮度被限制在489尼特。
PWM闪烁与Pixel 6相同,在最低亮度时在176.1和376.6赫兹之间有不均匀的闪烁,随着亮度水平的增加,幅度更加平缓。尽管如此,敏感的用户可能会遇到该设备的问题,特别是由于不支持直流调光。
|
Brightness Distribution: 97 %
Center on Battery: 794 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 0.9 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 1.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
98.5% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.23
Google Pixel 6 Pro LTPO-OLED, 3120x1440, 6.7" | Samsung Galaxy S22+ AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.6" | Xiaomi 12 Pro AMOLED, 3200x1440, 6.7" | Apple iPhone 13 Pro OLED, 2532x1170, 6.1" | Oppo Find X5 Pro AMOLED, 3216x1440, 6.7" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | -38% | -8% | 8% | 1% | |
Brightness middle | 794 | 1090 37% | 959 21% | 1050 32% | 746 -6% |
Brightness | 801 | 1097 37% | 977 22% | 1058 32% | 744 -7% |
Brightness Distribution | 97 | 98 1% | 96 -1% | 98 1% | 97 0% |
Black Level * | |||||
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 0.9 | 2.5 -178% | 1.1 -22% | 1 -11% | 0.9 -0% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 2.2 | 3.8 -73% | 3.1 -41% | 2.4 -9% | 1.6 27% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.5 | 2.3 -53% | 1.9 -27% | 1.5 -0% | 1.6 -7% |
Gamma | 2.23 99% | 2.04 108% | 2.22 99% | 2.2 100% | 2.23 99% |
CCT | 6654 98% | 6492 100% | 6498 100% | 6504 100% | 6499 100% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 360.5 Hz | ||
The display backlight flickers at 360.5 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 360.5 Hz is relatively high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. However, there are reports that some users are still sensitive to PWM at 500 Hz and above, so be aware. 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. |
具有各种亮度设置的固定变焦
我们发现颜色配置文件 "自然 "能产生最准确的颜色。请记住,它只限于较小的sRGB色彩空间。如果你想使用更大的DCI-P3色彩空间,你需要启用 "自适应 "或 "生动 "色彩模式。两者都具有非常相似的白平衡,但饱和度不同。
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
1.354 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.73 ms rise | |
↘ 0.624 ms fall | ||
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 5 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
0.692 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.346 ms rise | |
↘ 0.346 ms fall | ||
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 1 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). |
户外使用性总体上非常好,但不如其他设备,例如,Test Samsung Galaxy S22+ Smartphone - Die große Version des Galaxy S22 Galaxy S22 Plus。
正如预期的那样,可视角度非常好,只有亮度略有下降,在极端角度下没有明显的色差。
性能 - 采用谷歌SoC的Pixel智能手机
与它的兄弟姐妹一样,谷歌Pixel 6 Pro采用了谷歌自己的Google TensorSoC。它可以使用12GB的LPDDR5内存,Titan M2安全芯片,以及一个集成的ARM Mali-G78 MP20GPU。这种组合绝对可以在移动设备的高端光谱中找到,应该会有非常流畅的系统和游戏性能。
总的来说,该SoC的表现非常好,但结果是无法跟上更近期的竞争对手。然而,去年的SoC更有可能成为有价值的竞争对手,但内存写入性能比预期的略慢。不过,这在日常使用中应该不会产生任何影响。
AImark - Score v2.x | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Average Google Tensor (5723 - 5967, n=3) | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro |
UL Procyon AI Inference for Android - Overall Score NNAPI | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro | |
Average Google Tensor (21639 - 28581, n=3) | |
Average of class Smartphone (1267 - 81594, n=150, last 2 years) |
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7: T-Rex Onscreen | 1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen
GFXBench 3.0: on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL | 1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
GFXBench 3.1: on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen | 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
GFXBench: on screen Car Chase Onscreen | 1920x1080 Car Chase Offscreen | on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen | 2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen | on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen | 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ |
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro |
3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro |
3DMark / Wild Life Score | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro |
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro |
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro |
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro |
3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro |
3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro |
3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro |
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro |
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro |
GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro |
GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro |
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro |
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro |
GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro |
GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro |
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro |
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro |
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro |
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ |
Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro (Safari 15) | |
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=169, last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Chrome 100.0.4896.127) | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro (Chrome 99) | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro (Chrome 100) | |
Average Google Tensor (75.3 - 91.7, n=3) | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro (Chrome 97) |
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro (Safari 15) | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro (Chrome 100) | |
Average Google Tensor (180.4 - 189.6, n=2) | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro (Chrome 99) | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro (Chrome 97) | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Chrome 100.0.4896.127) |
Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro (Safari 15) | |
Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=152, last 2 years) | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro (Chrome 100) | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Chrome 100.0.4896.127) | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro (Chrome 99) | |
Average Google Tensor (90.4 - 111, n=3) | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro (Chrome 97) |
WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro (Safari 15) | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Chrome 100.0.4896.127) | |
Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years) | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro (Chrome 99) | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro (Chrome 97) | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro (Chrome 100) | |
Average Google Tensor (77 - 110, n=3) |
Octane V2 - Total Score | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro (Safari 15) | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Chrome 100.0.4896.127) | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro (Chrome 100) | |
Average Google Tensor (33046 - 44034, n=3) | |
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=210, last 2 years) | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro (Chrome 99) | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro (Chrome 97) |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Chrome 100.0.4896.127) | |
Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=167, last 2 years) | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro (Chrome 97) | |
Average Google Tensor (915 - 1532, n=3) | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro (Chrome 99) | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro (Chrome 100) | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro (Safari 15) |
* ... smaller is better
Google Pixel 6 Pro | Samsung Galaxy S22+ | Xiaomi 12 Pro | Oppo Find X5 Pro | Google Pixel 5 | Average 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AndroBench 3-5 | 130% | 203% | 80% | -18% | 84% | 180% | |
Sequential Read 256KB | 1560 | 1629.99 4% | 1620 4% | 1410 -10% | 851 -45% | 1602 ? 3% | 1894 ? 21% |
Sequential Write 256KB | 242.5 | 1001.67 313% | 1465 504% | 894 269% | 190 -22% | 748 ? 208% | 1476 ? 509% |
Random Read 4KB | 129.4 | 306.7 137% | 324.9 151% | 183.7 42% | 138.9 7% | 243 ? 88% | 278 ? 115% |
Random Write 4KB | 178.5 | 297.67 67% | 448.9 151% | 210.4 18% | 155.9 -13% | 244 ? 37% | 312 ? 75% |
排放 - 谷歌张量的短期性能爆发
温度
闲置时,谷歌Pixel 6 Pro基本保持凉爽,即使在负载下也只是选择性地轻微升温。
然而,在其凉爽的外壳内,情况就大不相同了。在运行3DMark Wild Life压力测试时,谷歌的TensorSoc受到了极大的影响,不得不对其性能进行热调节,最高可达56%。不过,谷歌Pixel 6 Pro的情况非常好,因为这与三星的三星Galaxy S21 FE 5G评论。粉丝版智能手机进入下一回合Galaxy S21 FE'sSnapdragon 888 非常相似。
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 37.3 °C / 99 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 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25.3 °C / 78 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
3DMark Wild Life Stress Test
3DMark | |
Wild Life Stress Test Stability | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro | |
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test | |
Apple iPhone 13 Pro | |
Oppo Find X5 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy S22+ | |
Google Pixel 6 Pro | |
Xiaomi 12 Pro |
演讲者
谷歌Pixel 6 Pro的两个扬声器总体表现相对较好,低音不足,只有在高音量时才会变得更加明显和引人注目。
有线声音输出只支持通过USB-C,而且不包括兼容的加密狗,必须单独购买。无线蓝牙音频输出通过SBC、AAC、aptX、aptX HD和LDAC支持高清晰音频。
Google Pixel 6 Pro audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 18.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 7% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 88% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 26% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 67% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (91.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.8% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 13% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 79% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 34% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 58% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
能源管理--超过5000毫安时的Pixel 6 Pro
消耗功率
在我们的测试中,谷歌Pixel 6 Pro的耗电量原来并不明显,总体上相当低。
它的5,003毫安时电池支持最高30瓦的有线充电,谷歌提供的可选29瓦电源。第三方电源将需要支持USB-PD 3.0,以实现快速充电。
另外,Pixel 6 Pro也可以进行无线充电。可选的谷歌Pixel Stand 2的充电功率高达23W,其他经Qi认证的EPP电源仅有12W,设备支持反向无线充电。
Off / Standby | 0.03 / 0.11 Watt |
Idle | 0.7 / 1 / 1.04 Watt |
Load |
6.87 / 9.87 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Google Pixel 6 Pro 5003 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S22+ 4500 mAh | Xiaomi 12 Pro 4600 mAh | Apple iPhone 13 Pro 3095 mAh | Oppo Find X5 Pro 5000 mAh | Average Google Tensor | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -7% | -10% | 6% | -15% | -3% | -25% | |
Idle Minimum * | 0.7 | 0.71 -1% | 0.94 -34% | 0.51 27% | 1.24 -77% | 0.687 ? 2% | 0.883 ? -26% |
Idle Average * | 1 | 1.1 -10% | 1.24 -24% | 1.54 -54% | 1.39 -39% | 1.187 ? -19% | 1.467 ? -47% |
Idle Maximum * | 1.04 | 1.19 -14% | 1.34 -29% | 1.57 -51% | 1.42 -37% | 1.213 ? -17% | 1.621 ? -56% |
Load Average * | 6.87 | 7.74 -13% | 5.7 17% | 3.06 55% | 3.58 48% | 5.88 ? 14% | 6.58 ? 4% |
Load Maximum * | 9.87 | 9.64 2% | 8.12 18% | 4.59 53% | 6.99 29% | 9.2 ? 7% | 9.91 ? -0% |
* ... smaller is better
Power Consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)
Power Consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)
电池寿命
尽管Pixel 6 Pro的电池很大,但在我们的测试中,它的表现几乎与Pixel 6,它的电池小得多,为4,614 mAh。进一步的改进是可能的,例如支持更现代和灵活的自适应显示刷新率。
综合考虑,该设备应能轻松度过漫长的一天。
Google Pixel 6 Pro 5003 mAh | Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G 4500 mAh | Xiaomi 12 Pro 4600 mAh | Apple iPhone 13 Pro 3095 mAh | Oppo Find X5 Pro 5000 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | -11% | 15% | 49% | 18% | |
WiFi v1.3 | 667 | 594 -11% | 766 15% | 993 49% | 788 18% |
Reader / Idle | 1430 | 2036 | 2614 | 1269 | |
H.264 | 934 | 788 | 1493 | 1142 | |
Load | 388 | 337 | 333 | 367 |
Pros
Cons
结论 - 强大的设备
谷歌Pixel 6 Pro在几个方面改进了更实惠的Pixel 6。它的圆形显示屏意味着拿在手里更舒服,而且你几乎注意不到它的尺寸增加。更高的120赫兹刷新率意味着它看起来和感觉都更流畅。改进后的相机阵列不仅有后置的长焦镜头,还有一个分辨率更高的前置相机。
无线和反向无线充电、防止灰尘和水进入的IP68认证、快速Wi-Fi和现代5G连接完成了整个包装,即使是最宽敞的SKU,其MSRP也只略高于1000美元。
谷歌Pixel 6 Pro是一款功能强大的高端智能手机,拥有纯粹的Android ,并拥有良好的三摄阵列。
与其更昂贵的竞争对手相比,谷歌Pixel 6 Pro确实存在一些不足之处。例如,它的USB 3.2端口不携带显示输出信号,而且它的自适应显示器只支持60或120赫兹。电池寿命肯定会从更灵活的方法中受益。在我们的测试中,它的Wi-Fi 6E支持变得非常不稳定和不可靠。Pixel 6 Pro的更新周期非常长,但我们过去曾遇到过更新分发和延迟的问题。说到这里,最新的4月更新及时到来,没有造成任何问题。
如果你想要一个长的更新周期,你也可以仔细看看三星的Galaxy S22-系列智能手机,它承诺比谷歌的Pixel 6-系列有一个额外的功能更新。其他强大的Android 智能手机包括小米12 Pro和Find X5 Pro,尽管这些手机的价格较高,而且并非在每个市场都有。
Google Pixel 6 Pro
- 08/30/2022 v7 (old)
Daniel Schmidt