Ulefone Note 14智能手机评测 - 100欧元的手机能做什么？
潜在的竞争对手比较
rating | date | model | weight | drive | size | resolution | price from |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 72.2 % v7 (old) | 01 / 2023 | Ulefone Note 14 Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300 | 189 g | 64 GB eMMC Flash | 6.52" | 1600x720 | |
| 75.1 % v7 (old) | 09 / 2022 | Motorola Moto E32s Helio G37, PowerVR GE8320 | 185 g | 32 GB eMMC Flash | 6.50" | 1600x720 | |
| 74.3 % v7 (old) | 12 / 2019 | Nokia 2.3 Helio A22 MT6761, PowerVR GE8300 | 183 g | 32 GB eMMC Flash | 6.20" | 1520x720 | |
| 74.7 % v7 (old) | 10 / 2022 | Samsung Galaxy A04s Exynos 850, Mali-G52 MP1 | 195 g | 32 GB eMMC Flash | 6.50" | 1600x720 |
外壳和设备 - 最便宜的变体几乎无法使用
如果你在大型互联网平台上寻找廉价手机，你很快就会偶然发现像Ulefone这样的供应商，它主要以户外手机闻名。然而，该制造商也提供廉价的Note系列传统智能手机，例如Ulefone Note 14，有时报价略低于100欧元（约109美元）。
然而，我们不会推荐最便宜的手机版本。那么你就必须使用16GB的内部存储和3GB的内存。由于Android 12也需要其存储空间，所以几乎没有任何空间留给图片或额外的应用程序。最好是选择64GB存储空间的版本，它也有4GB的内存，价格比制造商高出近30欧元（约33美元）。
虽然内部存储可以通过micro-SD卡扩展，而且读卡器在我们与参考卡Angelbird V60的测试中速度表现良好，但并非所有数据都能存储。
Ulefone Note 14配备了一个简单的塑料外壳，有三种颜色可供选择。青柠绿、深灰色和精致的紫色可供选择。相机模块的设计也很好，开槽的音量摇杆看起来也很漂亮。一些材料的过渡很明显，但从手机的价格范围来看，做工和稳定性都不错。
没有NFC模块，所以不能使用移动支付服务。由于缺少Widevin-L1认证，所以也不可能以全高清观看Netflix或Prime Video的流媒体。
| SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A04s (Angelbird V60) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (7.7 - 77, n=78, last 2 years) | |
| Ulefone Note 14 (Angelbird V60) | |
| Motorola Moto E32s (Angelbird V60) | |
Cross Platform Disk Test (CPDT)
通信、软件和操作 - 合理的最新的操作系统
Ulefone配备了WiFi 5，所以你可以以令人信服的速度上网。在我们与参考路由器华硕ROG Rapture AXE11000的测试中，数据速率也相当稳定。
在这个价格范围内，你不能指望现代的5G无线网络，LTE也被限制在很少的频段。重要的B20频段是可用的，所以这款手机可能在欧盟范围内使用没有任何问题。然而，对于更远的旅行来说，移动互联网是绝对不能保证的。在我们的随机测试中，4G网络的接收有点不稳定，信号强度一般比高端手机低很多。
Ulefone Note 14配备了相当最新的Android 12，但目前还不清楚是否会有更新的操作系统版本。至少到目前为止，制造商在安全补丁方面相当可靠，并在2022年11月发布了一个更新，在测试时仍是相对最新的版本。该制造商安装了一些自己的应用程序，但我们无法发现任何第三方广告应用程序。
虽然待机按钮看起来有一个集成的指纹传感器，但Note 14在这里令人失望。你只能通过面部识别来解锁，这在没有红外光和深度传感器的情况下是相对不安全的。触摸屏可以可靠地操作，但它不是最快的，这也是由于60赫兹面板的原因。
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Nokia 2.3 | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Nokia 2.3 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| Ulefone Note 14 | |
| Samsung Galaxy A04s | |
| Motorola Moto E32s | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Ulefone Note 14 | |
| Motorola Moto E32s | |
| Samsung Galaxy A04s | |
相机 - 泥泞的单机
虽然背面出现了两个相机镜头，但其中一个只是深度传感器，应该是为了支持相机的人像拍摄。因此，实际上可以只用一个摄像头来拍摄照片。
它的最大分辨率为1300万像素，在我们的测试中拍摄的照片相当暗淡，细节很少。即使在这个价格范围内，人们也可以期待更多一些，而且在低光下的成像性能也相应地很差。
视频可以以最大的1080p和30帧的速度录制。在这里你也应该降低你的期望。在找到正确的设置之前，自动对焦的抽动相当强烈，亮度调整有时需要更长的时间。
前面有一个500万像素的自拍相机。照片看起来有点偏蓝，也没有很好的提亮。
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.
Main camera FlowerMain camera EnvironmentMain camera Low Light
显示 - 很适合在室内使用
1,600 x 720像素的IPS显示屏达到了379 cd/m²的平均亮度，因此，大致上可以与 三星Galaxy A04s.你可以用它在室内工作，但在室外明亮的日子里，屏幕上会出现强烈的反光，这往往会覆盖在内容上。
亮度分布有些不均匀，所以即使用肉眼仔细观察，你也能看到屏幕不同区域的细微差别。我们还注意到灰度中的蓝色偏移。
至少在没有PWM的情况下，显示屏可以管理，即使在非常低的亮度下也是如此。
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 83 %
Center on Battery: 419 cd/m²
Contrast: 1397:1 (Black: 0.3 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.77 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 4.8 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
91.3% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.156
| Ulefone Note 14 IPS, 1600x720, 6.5" | Motorola Moto E32s IPS, 1600x720, 6.5" | Nokia 2.3 IPS, 1520x720, 6.2" | Samsung Galaxy A04s PLS, 1600x720, 6.5" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Response Times | 17% | -13% | -26% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 40.1 ? | 30 ? 25% | 49.2 ? -23% | 48 ? -20% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 25 ? | 23 ? 8% | 25.6 ? -2% | 33 ? -32% |
| PWM Frequency | 7692 ? | |||
| Screen | -17% | 4% | 2% | |
| Brightness middle | 419 | 346 -17% | 515 23% | 426 2% |
| Brightness | 379 | 330 -13% | 488 29% | 390 3% |
| Brightness Distribution | 83 | 90 8% | 92 11% | 84 1% |
| Black Level * | 0.3 | 0.47 -57% | 0.23 23% | 0.33 -10% |
| Contrast | 1397 | 736 -47% | 2239 60% | 1291 -8% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.77 | 5.4 -13% | 6.1 -28% | 4.39 8% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 10.61 | 9 15% | 13.4 -26% | 7.97 25% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 4.8 | 5.5 -15% | 7.7 -60% | 5.1 -6% |
| Gamma | 2.156 102% | 2.874 77% | 2.26 97% | 2.184 101% |
| CCT | 7541 86% | 5971 109% | 8639 75% | 7985 81% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | 0% /
-11% | -5% /
1% | -12% /
-4% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 25 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 12.5 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 12.5 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. » 55 % 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 | ||
| 40.1 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 22.6 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 17.5 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. » 60 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms). | ||
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 8746 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
性能、排放和电池寿命--几乎没有任何储备
随着 Helio A22Ulefone使用了一个已经4年的SoC，在日常使用中几乎没有任何性能储备。菜单中的动画不时出现生硬的情况，在更复杂的活动中，你只能调整音量或在应用程序之间切换时有很长的延迟。
Ulefone Note 14在性能上很难跟上其他制造商的类似价格的设备，所以你只能在打电话和发信息等活动中获得最必要的性能。eMMC存储也相当慢，所以复制过程和加载时间拖得很长。
至少在外壳上几乎没有任何明显的发热。
单声道扬声器是可用的，但听起来很重的高音和闷响。aptX和aptX HD以及SBC、AAC和LDAC都可作为蓝牙编解码器。
Ulefone Note 14的电池容量为4,500毫安时，它的电池容量略低于，如 Galaxy A04s或 摩托罗拉Moto E32s.这在运行时间上也很明显，在我们的WLAN测试中，14:43小时的运行时间仍然可以说是中度使用的1-2天的时间。然而，只用5瓦特的电源充电需要很长的时间。根据充电前的电池状态，甚至超过3小时直到电池充满也是很可能的。
| PCMark for Android - Work 3.0 | |
| Average of class Smartphone (4609 - 24088, n=190, last 2 years) | |
| Motorola Moto E32s | |
| Samsung Galaxy A04s | |
| Ulefone Note 14 | |
| Average Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761 (4766 - 4888, n=2) | |
| GFXBench | |
| on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen | |
| Average of class Smartphone (3.6 - 123, n=201, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A04s | |
| Motorola Moto E32s | |
| Average Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761 (2.3 - 6.1, n=14) | |
| Ulefone Note 14 | |
| Nokia 2.3 | |
| 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2.3 - 261, n=201, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A04s | |
| Motorola Moto E32s | |
| Average Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761 (1.9 - 4.2, n=14) | |
| Ulefone Note 14 | |
| Nokia 2.3 | |
| on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen | |
| Average of class Smartphone (0.85 - 119, n=201, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A04s | |
| Motorola Moto E32s | |
| Average Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761 (2.7 - 3.9, n=14) | |
| Nokia 2.3 | |
| Ulefone Note 14 | |
| 2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen | |
| Average of class Smartphone (0.85 - 104, n=201, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A04s | |
| Motorola Moto E32s | |
| Ulefone Note 14 | |
| Nokia 2.3 | |
| Average Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761 (0.7 - 0.9, n=14) | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=203, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A04s | |
| Ulefone Note 14 | |
| Average Mediatek Helio A22 MT6761 (3920 - 5041, n=8) | |
| Ulefone Note 14 | Motorola Moto E32s | Nokia 2.3 | Samsung Galaxy A04s | Average 64 GB eMMC Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | 43% | 30% | 78% | 33% | 948% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 294 | 248.6 -15% | 261.8 -11% | 302.4 3% | 274 ? -7% | 1839 ? 526% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 208 | 184.3 -11% | 149.2 -28% | 83.3 -60% | 176.2 ? -15% | 1425 ? 585% |
| Random Read 4KB | 55 | 49.1 -11% | 69.6 27% | 62.7 14% | 59.4 ? 8% | 277 ? 404% |
| Random Write 4KB | 13 | 40 208% | 30.33 133% | 58.9 353% | 32 ? 146% | 309 ? 2277% |
温度
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 35 °C / 95 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 38.8 °C / 102 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 21.8 °C / 71 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
演讲者
Ulefone Note 14 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (79.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 34.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 9.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (12.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (38.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 84% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 15% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 94% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 5% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Samsung Galaxy A04s audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (78.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 26.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 8.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.8% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (26.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 64% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 30% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 79% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 17% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
电池寿命
| Battery Runtime - WiFi Websurfing | |
| Average of class Smartphone (476 - 3244, n=202, last 2 years) | |
| Samsung Galaxy A04s | |
| Motorola Moto E32s | |
| Nokia 2.3 | |
| Ulefone Note 14 | |
Pros
Cons
评语 - 漂亮，但几乎没有内在价值
目前，你最多投资130欧元（约合141美元）购买Ulefone Note 14，就能得到一部非常别致的手机，如果需要，还能为日常生活带来色彩。然而，内在价值与相当漂亮的外表不在同一水平线上。相机拍出的照片灰蒙蒙的，相当阴暗，处理器的速度只够完成基本任务，而且你会徒劳地寻找NFC。
运行时间很实用，屏幕的亮度也足以满足室内使用。制造商的安全更新也相当可靠，到测试时的间隔为几个月，而且有相当好的蓝牙编解码设备。此外，还有一个相当全面的配件包，盒子里有一个保险杠、粘贴式手机支架和充电器。
然而，缺少一个指纹传感器，而且手机只提供蹩脚的内存。如果你能接受这些限制，并且只是在寻找一款便宜的手机，你可以给Ulefone Note 14一个机会。我们不会推荐16GB的存储版本，它已经不是最新的了。
Ulefone Note 14是一款廉价的、非常简单的智能手机，外观很有吸引力。然而，考虑到功能稀缺，你也应该考虑该价格范围内的替代品。
在这个价格范围内，你将不得不接受妥协，而一个 三星Galaxy A04s则有更快的SoC，稍好的相机，NFC和90赫兹的屏幕，而且价格也不贵。这款手机 摩托罗拉Moto E32s也有一个90赫兹的屏幕，并提供更长的运行时间。
价格和可用性
Ulefone Note 14可以直接从制造商那里购买，地址是https://www.ulefone.com/note-14-p1521.html尽管运费相当高。
小的16GB存储版本也可以在amazon.de上以不到100欧元（约109美元）的价格买到。，64GB型号也是如此，价格约为110欧元（约119美元），网址：amazon.de.
Ulefone Note 14
- 01/14/2023 v7 (old)
Florian Schmitt
Price comparison
