谷歌Pixel 6 Pro评测--带香草味的眼球糖Android

Name: Google Pixel 6 Pro
Brand: Google

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。

尺寸比较

Google Pixel 6 Pro Xiaomi 12 Pro Oppo Find X5 Pro Samsung Galaxy S22+ Apple iPhone 13 Pro DIN A6 ❌

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 Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1736 (874^min - 1780^max) MBit/s
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1465 (1307^min - 1536^max) MBit/s -16%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	826 (765^min - 881^max) MBit/s -52%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	820 (799^min - 837^max) MBit/s -53%
Average of class Smartphone (34.8 - 1875, n=185, last 2 years)	713 MBit/s -59%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1710 (876^min - 1774^max) MBit/s
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1214 (516^min - 1524^max) MBit/s -29%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	899 (432^min - 966^max) MBit/s -47%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	890 (433^min - 934^max) MBit/s -48%
Average of class Smartphone (40.5 - 1810, n=187, last 2 years)	730 MBit/s -57%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
Average of class Smartphone (229 - 1902, n=77, last 2 years)	1445 MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1346 (696^min - 1430^max) MBit/s
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1565 (777^min - 1666^max) MBit/s
Average of class Smartphone (668 - 1864, n=77, last 2 years)	1373 MBit/s
iperf3 transmit AX12
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	698 (632^min - 775^max) MBit/s
iperf3 receive AX12
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	660 (599^min - 698^max) MBit/s

Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Samsung Xclipse 920; iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1323 (696-1430)

Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Samsung Xclipse 920; iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1538 (777-1666)

Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor, ARM Mali-G78 MP20; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1705 (874-1780)

Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Samsung Xclipse 920; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø825 (765-881)

Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor, ARM Mali-G78 MP20; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1681 (876-1774)

Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Samsung Xclipse 920; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø885 (432-966)

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.

Hauptkamera Hauptkamera Ultraweitwinkel 5-facher Zoom Low-Light

click to load images

click to load images

click to load images

click to load images

click to load images

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。


797 cd/m²	800 cd/m²	814 cd/m²
796 cd/m²	794 cd/m²	813 cd/m²
793 cd/m²	792 cd/m²	809 cd/m²

Distribution of brightness

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 3

Maximum: 814 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 800.9 cd/m² Minimum: 1.91 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 97 %
Center on Battery: 794 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 0.9 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
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)

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

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 8743 (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

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
1.354 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 0.73 ms rise
1.354 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 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 (21 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
0.692 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 0.346 ms rise
0.692 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 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 (32.9 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。

Geekbench 5.5
Single-Core
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144	1749 Points +65%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	1257 Points +19%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	1192 Points +13%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	1133 Points +7%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288	1057 Points
Average Google Tensor (1025 - 1057, n=3)	1041 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone (126 - 2437, n=172, last 2 years)	995 Points -6%
Multi-Core
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144	4829 Points +64%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	3738 Points +27%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	3599 Points +22%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	3488 Points +19%
Average of class Smartphone (473 - 6687, n=172, last 2 years)	3312 Points +13%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288	2941 Points
Average Google Tensor (2805 - 2941, n=3)	2895 Points -2%

Antutu v9 - Total Score
Xiaomi 12 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	962824 Points +34%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	856953 Points +19%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	850401 Points +18%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144	800608 Points +11%
Average of class Smartphone (99654 - 1650926, n=104, last 2 years)	798401 Points +11%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288	720905 Points
Average Google Tensor (702981 - 720905, n=3)	713075 Points -1%

PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	14998 Points +29%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	13131 Points +13%
Average of class Smartphone (4609 - 24088, n=190, last 2 years)	12976 Points +12%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	12144 Points +5%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288	11605 Points
Average Google Tensor (9717 - 11605, n=3)	10577 Points -9%

CrossMark - Overall
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144	1135 Points +25%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	1129 Points +25%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	956 Points +6%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288	906 Points
Average of class Smartphone (187 - 1517, n=157, last 2 years)	884 Points -2%
Average Google Tensor (849 - 906, n=3)	873 Points -4%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	811 Points -10%

BaseMark OS II
Overall
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	7186 Points +19%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	6799 Points +12%
Average of class Smartphone (1196 - 11976, n=151, last 2 years)	6297 Points +4%
Average Google Tensor (5950 - 6287, n=3)	6097 Points +1%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288	6053 Points
Xiaomi 12 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	6007 Points -1%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144	0 Points -100%
System
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	11373 Points +26%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	10340 Points +15%
Average of class Smartphone (2368 - 16475, n=151, last 2 years)	10163 Points +13%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	10006 Points +11%
Average Google Tensor (9009 - 9109, n=3)	9068 Points +1%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288	9009 Points
Memory
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	6844 Points +8%
Average of class Smartphone (962 - 12716, n=151, last 2 years)	6767 Points +7%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	6523 Points +3%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288	6336 Points
Average Google Tensor (6071 - 6592, n=3)	6333 Points 0%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	5125 Points -19%
Graphics
Oppo Find X5 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	21944 Points +65%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	17475 Points +31%
Average of class Smartphone (1017 - 58651, n=151, last 2 years)	16908 Points +27%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	15216 Points +14%
Average Google Tensor (13319 - 15303, n=3)	14257 Points +7%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288	13319 Points
Web
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	1960 Points +11%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288	1765 Points
Average Google Tensor (1476 - 1851, n=3)	1697 Points -4%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	1669 Points -5%
Average of class Smartphone (841 - 2145, n=151, last 2 years)	1564 Points -11%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	1444 Points -18%

AImark - Score v2.x
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Apple A15 Bionic, A15 GPU 5-Core, 6144	105536 Points +1725%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	72572 Points +1155%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Samsung Exynos 2200, Xclipse 920, 8192	6323 Points +9%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	5982 Points +3%
Average Google Tensor (5723 - 5967, n=3)	5824 Points +1%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288	5782 Points

UL Procyon AI Inference for Android - Overall Score NNAPI
Oppo Find X5 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	68880 Points +146%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730, 12288	63613 Points +128%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor, Mali-G78 MP20, 12288	27946 Points
Average Google Tensor (21639 - 28581, n=3)	26055 Points -7%
Average of class Smartphone (1267 - 74958, n=143, last 2 years)	16841 Points -40%

3DMark: Wild Life Extreme Unlimited | Wild Life Extreme | Wild Life Unlimited Score | Wild Life Score | 2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics | 2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics | 2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited | 2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited | 2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics | 2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics
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 A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	2864 Points +43%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	2523 Points +26%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	2513 Points +26%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1998 Points
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1935 Points -3%

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	3059 Points +55%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	2609 Points +32%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	2575 Points +31%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	2202 Points +12%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	1973 Points

3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	11700 Points +66%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	10384 Points +47%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	10175 Points +44%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	7890 Points +12%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	7057 Points

3DMark / Wild Life Score
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	9927 Points +52%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	9826 Points +51%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	9386 Points +44%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	7710 Points +18%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	6516 Points

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	4150 Points +6%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	3919 Points
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	3909 Points 0%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	3902 Points 0%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	1852 Points -53%

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	18090 Points +69%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	16221 Points +51%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	14680 Points +37%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	13950 Points +30%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	10733 Points

3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	10005 Points +29%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	9149 Points +18%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	9105 Points +18%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	7742 Points
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	5956 Points -23%

3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	12123 Points +26%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	11221 Points +16%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	10958 Points +14%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	9654 Points
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	7773 Points -19%

3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	31940 Points +105%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	25285 Points +63%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	23949 Points +54%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	20842 Points +34%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	15556 Points

3DMark / Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	4296 Points +4%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	4147 Points
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	4120 Points -1%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	3923 Points -5%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	2130 Points -49%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	121 fps +20%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	119 fps +18%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	101 fps
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	60 fps -41%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	60 fps -41%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	425 fps +240%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	417 fps +234%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	380 fps +204%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	320 fps +156%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	125 fps

GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	119 fps +83%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	117 fps +80%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	65 fps
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	60 fps -8%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	60 fps -8%

GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	251 fps +182%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	229 fps +157%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	214 fps +140%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	181 fps +103%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	89 fps

GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	114 fps +171%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	87 fps +107%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	60 fps +43%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	56 fps +33%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	42 fps

GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	169 fps +160%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	151 fps +132%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	130 fps +100%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	111 fps +71%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	65 fps

GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	73 fps +143%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	60 fps +100%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	39 fps +30%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	36 fps +20%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	30 fps

GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	95 fps +98%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	72 fps +50%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	71 fps +48%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	63 fps +31%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	48 fps

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	60 fps +88%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	54 fps +69%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	36 fps +13%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	32 fps
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	27 fps -16%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	40 fps +33%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	39 fps +30%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	34 fps +13%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	31 fps +3%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	30 fps

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	67 fps +56%
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	60 fps +40%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	53 fps +23%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	44 fps +2%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	43 fps

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	119 fps +72%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	94 fps +36%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	92 fps +33%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	69 fps
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	60 fps -13%

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 13 Pro (Safari 15)	181.6 Points +98%
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=161, last 2 years)	120.4 Points +31%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Chrome 100.0.4896.127)	107.364 Points +17%
Oppo Find X5 Pro (Chrome 99)	103 Points +12%
Google Pixel 6 Pro (Chrome 100)	91.7 Points
Average Google Tensor (75.3 - 91.7, n=3)	85.7 Points -7%
Xiaomi 12 Pro (Chrome 97)	84.1 Points -8%

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 13 Pro (Safari 15)	413.7 Points +118%
Google Pixel 6 Pro (Chrome 100)	189.6 Points
Average Google Tensor (180.4 - 189.6, n=2)	185 Points -2%
Oppo Find X5 Pro (Chrome 99)	172.8 Points -9%
Xiaomi 12 Pro (Chrome 97)	147.5 Points -22%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Chrome 100.0.4896.127)	135.54 Points -29%

Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Apple iPhone 13 Pro (Safari 15)	243 runs/min +119%
Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=146, last 2 years)	136.2 runs/min +23%
Google Pixel 6 Pro (Chrome 100)	111 runs/min
Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Chrome 100.0.4896.127)	105 runs/min -5%
Oppo Find X5 Pro (Chrome 99)	104 runs/min -6%
Average Google Tensor (90.4 - 111, n=3)	101.8 runs/min -8%
Xiaomi 12 Pro (Chrome 97)	73.5 runs/min -34%

WebXPRT 3 - Overall
Apple iPhone 13 Pro (Safari 15)	248 Points +136%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Chrome 100.0.4896.127)	153 Points +46%
Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years)	148.7 Points +42%
Oppo Find X5 Pro (Chrome 99)	133 Points +27%
Xiaomi 12 Pro (Chrome 97)	119 Points +13%
Google Pixel 6 Pro (Chrome 100)	105 Points
Average Google Tensor (77 - 110, n=3)	97.3 Points -7%

Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 13 Pro (Safari 15)	64222 Points +46%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Chrome 100.0.4896.127)	44398 Points +1%
Google Pixel 6 Pro (Chrome 100)	44034 Points
Average Google Tensor (33046 - 44034, n=3)	40152 Points -9%
Oppo Find X5 Pro (Chrome 99)	38407 Points -13%
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=203, last 2 years)	37161 Points -16%
Xiaomi 12 Pro (Chrome 97)	29750 Points -32%

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=160, last 2 years)	1568 ms * -71%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Chrome 100.0.4896.127)	1557.9 ms * -70%
Xiaomi 12 Pro (Chrome 97)	1330 ms * -45%
Average Google Tensor (915 - 1532, n=3)	1160 ms * -27%
Oppo Find X5 Pro (Chrome 99)	1125 ms * -23%
Google Pixel 6 Pro (Chrome 100)	915 ms *
Apple iPhone 13 Pro (Safari 15)	413.6 ms * +55%

* ... 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%	85%	173%
Sequential Read 256KB	1560	1629.99 4%	1620 4%	1410 -10%	851 -45%	1600 ?(1030 - 3134, n=59) 3%	1839 ?(226 - 4512, n=192, last 2 years) 18%
Sequential Write 256KB	242.5	1001.67 313%	1465 504%	894 269%	190 -22%	756 ?(233 - 1332, n=59) 212%	1425 ?(57.5 - 3908, n=192, last 2 years) 488%
Random Read 4KB	129.4	306.7 137%	324.9 151%	183.7 42%	138.9 7%	244 ?(126.2 - 428, n=59) 89%	277 ?(22.2 - 483, n=192, last 2 years) 114%
Random Write 4KB	178.5	297.67 67%	448.9 151%	210.4 18%	155.9 -13%	243 ?(121.4 - 503, n=59) 36%	309 ?(9.4 - 753, n=192, last 2 years) 73%

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。

Max. Load

Idle


34.5 °C	33.9 °C	34.2 °C
35.5 °C	36.8 °C	34.7 °C
34.2 °C	37.3 °C	33.8 °C

Maximum: 37.3 °C
Average: 35 °C


33.7 °C	35 °C	35.1 °C
33.8 °C	35.5 °C	36 °C
33.4 °C	36 °C	35.5 °C

Maximum: 36 °C
Average: 34.9 °C

Room Temperature 22 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260

(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 35 °C / 95 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 37.3 °C / 99 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 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 A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	81.2 (47.5^min) % +87%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	62.7 (37.2^min) % +44%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	58.2 (27.4^min) % +34%
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	47.2 (27.4^min) % +9%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	43.4 (17.4^min) %
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Apple iPhone 13 Pro A15 GPU 5-Core, A15, 256 GB NVMe	70.7 (13.1^min) % +61%
Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	62.7 (9.64^min) % +43%
Samsung Galaxy S22+ Xclipse 920, Exynos 2200, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	60.9 (8.06^min) % +38%
Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	44 (5.37^min) %
Xiaomi 12 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash	% -100%

Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.9.1: Ø7.56 (5.37-12.2)

Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.8.1: Ø10.9 (9.64-15.4)

Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G Adreno 660, SD 888 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.7.2: Ø5.44 (5.09-9.07)

Google Pixel 6 Pro Mali-G78 MP20, Tensor, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø27.6 (17.4-40.2)

Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø41.7 (37.2-59.4)

Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G Adreno 660, SD 888 5G, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø22.6 (20-34.1)

Oppo Find X5 Pro Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability: Ø43.7 (38.1-60.9)

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。

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

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
» 12% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 80% 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。

Power Consumption

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%	-24%
Idle Minimum *	0.7	0.71 -1%	0.94 -34%	0.51 27%	1.24 -77%	0.687 ?(0.68 - 0.7, n=3) 2%	0.894 ?(0.4 - 2.37, n=152, last 2 years) -28%
Idle Average *	1	1.1 -10%	1.24 -24%	1.54 -54%	1.39 -39%	1.187 ?(1 - 1.56, n=3) -19%	1.456 ?(0.6 - 4.26, n=152, last 2 years) -46%
Idle Maximum *	1.04	1.19 -14%	1.34 -29%	1.57 -51%	1.42 -37%	1.213 ?(1.02 - 1.58, n=3) -17%	1.616 ?(0.83 - 4.45, n=152, last 2 years) -55%
Load Average *	6.87	7.74 -13%	5.7 17%	3.06 55%	3.58 48%	5.88 ?(5.37 - 6.87, n=3) 14%	6.45 ?(2.3 - 16.5, n=147, last 2 years) 6%
Load Maximum *	9.87	9.64 2%	8.12 18%	4.59 53%	6.99 29%	9.2 ?(8.74 - 9.87, n=3) 7%	9.8 ?(3.53 - 20.8, n=147, last 2 years) 1%

* ... smaller is better

Power Consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor: Ø5.64 (1.196-10.2)

Oppo Find X5 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1: Ø5.27 (0.963-10.9)

Power Consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)

Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø10.3 (9.15-12.5)

Oppo Find X5 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø9.58 (7.9-10.8)

Google Pixel 6 Pro Google Tensor; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.843 (0.767-1.248)

Oppo Find X5 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.933 (0.856-1.058)

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。

Battery Runtime


WiFi Websurfing (Chrome 99)		11h 07min

	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

+ 明亮且色彩准确的120 Hz OLED

+ 快速的SoC

+ IP68认证

+ 强大的三摄像头

+ 更新周期长

Cons

- 没有存储扩展

- 自适应刷新率仅在60和120赫兹之间

- 免提电话的语音质量差

- 没有通过USB的显示输出

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。

Download your licensed rating image as SVG / PNG

价格和可用性

Pixel 6 Pro可以直接通过Google购买。以及通常的零售渠道，如亚马逊.

Google Pixel 6 Pro - 08/30/2022 v7 ^(old)
Daniel Schmidt

Chassis

91%

Keyboard

67 / 75 → 89%

Pointing Device

94%

Connectivity

68 / 70 → 97%

Weight

88%

Battery

89%

Display

94%

Games Performance

62 / 64 → 96%

Application Performance

81 / 86 → 94%

Temperature

93%

Noise

100%

Audio

76 / 90 → 84%

Camera

81%

Average

83%

89%

Smartphone - Weighted Average

Price comparison

Editor of the original article: Finn D Boerne - Translator - 450 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2017

Translator: Ninh Ngoc Duy - Editorial Assistant - 460014 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 > 谷歌Pixel 6 Pro评测--带香草味的眼球糖Android

Daniel Schmidt, 2022-04-14 (Update: 2022-04-14)

Rating	Date	Model	Weight	Drive	Size	Resolution
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

谷歌Pixel 6 Pro评测--带香草味的眼球糖Android

更多溢价。

潜在的竞争对手比较

外壳--不比Pixel 6重多少

尺寸比较

连接性 - 带有快速USB的Pixel 6 Pro

软件--更新周期长，包括Android 15

通信和GNSS - 带有Wi-Fi 6和VHT160的快速Wi-Fi

电话和通话质量

相机 - 改进的Pixel 6设置

配件和保修 - Pixel智能手机，不带充电器

输入设备和处理 - 没有人脸检测

显示屏 - LTPO OLED，最高可达120赫兹

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

Display Response Times

性能 - 采用谷歌SoC的Pixel智能手机

排放 - 谷歌张量的短期性能爆发

温度

3DMark Wild Life Stress Test

演讲者

Google Pixel 6 Pro audio analysis

Samsung Galaxy S22+ audio analysis

能源管理--超过5000毫安时的Pixel 6 Pro

消耗功率

Power Consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

Power Consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)

电池寿命

Pros

Cons

结论 - 强大的设备

价格和可用性

More articles related to this device

Price comparison