索尼 Xperia E5 智能手机简短评测

Name: Sony Xperia E5
Brand: Sony

智能机世界的大门。在我们的测试中，索尼的Xperia E5入门级手机，是低价机中不错的机型。您将在我们的评测中了解到，竞争激烈下，购买它是否值得。

Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, ✓ Stefanie Voigt (translated by Kangfei Zheng), Published 06/10/2017 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

Android Touchscreen Smartphone

Test device courtesy of notebooksbilliger.de

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Sony Xperia E5 (Xperia Series)

Processor

Mediatek MT6735 4 x 1.5 GHz, Cortex-A53

Graphics adapter

ARM Mali-T720 MP2

Memory

1536 MB

Display

5.00 inch 16:9, 1280 x 720 pixel 294 PPI, 电容式触屏, LCD, IPS, glossy: yes

Storage

16 GB eMMC Flash, 16 GB

, 10.6 GB free

Connections

1 USB 2.0, Audio Connections: 3.5 毫米耳机接口, Card Reader: 200 GB storage via microSD card, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: proximity sensor, accelerometer, gyro, hall Sensor, compass, Mircacast

Networking

802.11a/b/g/n (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/), Bluetooth 4.1, GSM: 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900 MHz, 3G / UMTS: 850 / 900 / 1900 / 1700 / 2100 MHz, 4G/LTE: 700 / 800 / 850 / 1900 / 2600 / 2100 MHz , LTE, GPS

Size

height x width x depth (in mm): 8 x 144 x 69

Battery

2300 mAh Lithium-Ion

Operating System

Android 6.0 Marshmallow

Camera

Primary Camera: 13 MPix AF, HDR
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix

Additional features

Speakers: 单声道, Keyboard: 虚拟键盘, Keyboard Light: yes, modular power supply, USB cable, Sony UI, 24 Months Warranty, SAR value: 0,461 W/kg (body), fanless

Weight

147 g, Power Supply: 37 g

Price

200 Euro

Links

Sony homepage
Sony notebook section

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

see all specifications

Size Comparison

Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus Mali-G71 MP20, Exynos 8895, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	656 MBit/s +734%
UMI Max Mali-T860 MP2, Helio P10 MT6755, 16 GB eMMC Flash	98.8 MBit/s +26%
Sony Xperia E5 Mali-T720 MP2, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash	78.7 MBit/s
LG K8 2017 Adreno 308, 425, 16 GB eMMC Flash	49.2 MBit/s -37%
Coolpad Modena 2 Mali-T720 MP2, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash	48.4 MBit/s -39%
Gigaset GS160 Mali-T720 MP2, MT6737, 16 GB eMMC Flash	48.2 MBit/s -39%
iperf3 receive AX12
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus Mali-G71 MP20, Exynos 8895, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	368 MBit/s +361%
UMI Max Mali-T860 MP2, Helio P10 MT6755, 16 GB eMMC Flash	103 MBit/s +29%
Sony Xperia E5 Mali-T720 MP2, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash	79.9 MBit/s
LG K8 2017 Adreno 308, 425, 16 GB eMMC Flash	54.1 MBit/s -32%
Coolpad Modena 2 Mali-T720 MP2, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash	44.5 MBit/s -44%
Gigaset GS160 Mali-T720 MP2, MT6737, 16 GB eMMC Flash	33.5 MBit/s -58%
iperf Server (receive) TCP 1 m
Vernee Mars Mali-T860 MP2, Helio P10 MT6755, 32 GB eMMC Flash	81.1 MBit/s
Acer Liquid Zest Plus Mali-T720 MP2, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash	47.6 MBit/s
iperf Client (transmit) TCP 1 m
Acer Liquid Zest Plus Mali-T720 MP2, MT6735, 16 GB eMMC Flash	50 MBit/s
Vernee Mars Mali-T860 MP2, Helio P10 MT6755, 32 GB eMMC Flash	38.9 MBit/s

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

click to load images

click to load images


539 cd/m²	542 cd/m²	543 cd/m²
521 cd/m²	538 cd/m²	539 cd/m²
531 cd/m²	526 cd/m²	523 cd/m²

Distribution of brightness

LCD tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2

Maximum: 543 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 533.6 cd/m² Minimum: 50.23 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 96 %
Center on Battery: 538 cd/m²
Contrast: 1630:1 (Black: 0.33 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.7 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.93
ΔE Greyscale 4.7 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.51

	Sony Xperia E5 IPS, 1280x720, 5"	LG K8 2017 IPS, 1280x720, 5"	Gigaset GS160 IPS, 1280x720, 5"	Vernee Mars IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5"	ZTE Blade V7 Lite IPS, 1280x720, 5"	Acer Liquid Zest Plus IPS, 1280x720, 5.5"	UMI Max IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5"	LG G6 IPS LCD, 2880x1440, 5.7"
Screen		-34%	-37%	-9%	-26%	-30%	-10%	18%
Brightness middle	538	358 -33%	489 -9%	345 -36%	312 -42%	414 -23%	522 -3%	646 20%
Brightness	534	351 -34%	479 -10%	339 -37%	302 -43%	420 -21%	498 -7%	611 14%
Brightness Distribution	96	93 -3%	95 -1%	85 -11%	79 -18%	94 -2%	86 -10%	89 -7%
Black Level *	0.33	0.49 -48%	0.55 -67%	0.14 58%	0.15 55%	0.33 -0%	0.23 30%	0.23 30%
Contrast	1630	731 -55%	889 -45%	2464 51%	2080 28%	1255 -23%	2270 39%	2809 72%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	5.7	7.1 -25%	8.3 -46%	7.1 -25%	8.2 -44%	8.1 -42%	6.9 -21%	4.5 21%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	11	14.9 -35%	14.4 -31%	13.9 -26%	16.5 -50%	13.8 -25%	12.3 -12%	8.3 25%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	4.7	6.5 -38%	8.7 -85%	6.7 -43%	9.2 -96%	9.6 -104%	9.2 -96%	6 -28%
Gamma	2.51 ^88%	2.12 ^104%	2.08 ^106%	2.47 ^89%	2.29 ^96%	2 ^110%	2.38 ^92%	2.27 ^97%
CCT	7264 ^89%	8166 ^80%	9034 ^72%	7711 ^84%	9017 ^72%	7754 ^84%	8687 ^75%	7996 ^81%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)								67.74
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)								99.05

* ... 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 not detected

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8774 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

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
38.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 23.6 ms rise
38.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 15.2 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 96 % 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
42.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 19.2 ms rise
42.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 23.6 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. » 67 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms).

AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	32477 Points
LG K8 2017	30924 Points -5%
Gigaset GS160	28459 Points -12%
Vernee Mars	51008 Points +57%
Coolpad Modena 2	24875 Points -23%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	23822 Points -27%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	30676 Points -6%
UMI Max	49057 Points +51%

AndroBench 3-5
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	45.56 MB/s
LG K8 2017	52.2 MB/s +15%
Gigaset GS160	19.19 MB/s -58%
Vernee Mars	24 MB/s -47%
Coolpad Modena 2	18.25 MB/s -60%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	12.62 MB/s -72%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	16.17 MB/s -65%
UMI Max	18.07 MB/s -60%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	65 MB/s
LG K8 2017	78.6 MB/s +21%
Gigaset GS160	30.71 MB/s -53%
Vernee Mars	44.5 MB/s -32%
Coolpad Modena 2	35.59 MB/s -45%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	22.77 MB/s -65%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	27.68 MB/s -57%
UMI Max	36.64 MB/s -44%
Random Write 4KB (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	9.84 MB/s
LG K8 2017	12.5 MB/s +27%
Gigaset GS160	6.8 MB/s -31%
Vernee Mars	15.77 MB/s +60%
Coolpad Modena 2	6.79 MB/s -31%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	8.26 MB/s -16%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	7.95 MB/s -19%
UMI Max	10.91 MB/s +11%
Random Read 4KB (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	26.04 MB/s
LG K8 2017	41.6 MB/s +60%
Gigaset GS160	18.5 MB/s -29%
Vernee Mars	21.66 MB/s -17%
Coolpad Modena 2	23.03 MB/s -12%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	18.24 MB/s -30%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	20.25 MB/s -22%
UMI Max	26.66 MB/s +2%
Sequential Write 256KB (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	83.1 MB/s
LG K8 2017	84.6 MB/s +2%
Gigaset GS160	46.6 MB/s -44%
Vernee Mars	71.6 MB/s -14%
Coolpad Modena 2	42.56 MB/s -49%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	70.3 MB/s -15%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	39.51 MB/s -52%
UMI Max	69.5 MB/s -16%
Sequential Read 256KB (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	209.7 MB/s
LG K8 2017	270.8 MB/s +29%
Gigaset GS160	200.5 MB/s -4%
Vernee Mars	255.9 MB/s +22%
Coolpad Modena 2	147 MB/s -30%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	187.3 MB/s -11%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	178.6 MB/s -15%
UMI Max	257.9 MB/s +23%

Geekbench 4.0
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Gigaset GS160	518 Points
Vernee Mars	729 Points
Coolpad Modena 2	459 Points
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	572 Points
UMI Max	734 Points
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Gigaset GS160	1453 Points
Vernee Mars	2903 Points
Coolpad Modena 2	1274 Points
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	1588 Points
UMI Max	2701 Points

Geekbench 4.4
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	1527 Points
LG K8 2017	1737 Points +14%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	556 Points
LG K8 2017	642 Points +15%

3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	5200 Points
LG K8 2017	2951 Points -43%
Gigaset GS160	3780 Points -27%
Vernee Mars	10702 Points +106%
Coolpad Modena 2	3222 Points -38%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	3070 Points -41%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	4944 Points -5%
UMI Max	10942 Points +110%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	4615 Points
LG K8 2017	2546 Points -45%
Gigaset GS160	3291 Points -29%
Vernee Mars	10685 Points +132%
Coolpad Modena 2	2789 Points -40%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	2645 Points -43%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	4333 Points -6%
UMI Max	10612 Points +130%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	9349 Points
LG K8 2017	6656 Points -29%
Gigaset GS160	7881 Points -16%
Vernee Mars	10762 Points +15%
Coolpad Modena 2	7061 Points -24%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	7026 Points -25%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	9768 Points +4%
UMI Max	12239 Points +31%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	212 Points
LG K8 2017	39 Points -82%
Vernee Mars	602 Points +184%
Coolpad Modena 2	130 Points -39%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	124 Points -42%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	209 Points -1%
UMI Max	598 Points +182%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	175 Points
LG K8 2017	31 Points -82%
Vernee Mars	523 Points +199%
Coolpad Modena 2	106 Points -39%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	101 Points -42%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	172 Points -2%
UMI Max	521 Points +198%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	817 Points
LG K8 2017	622 Points -24%
Vernee Mars	1100 Points +35%
Coolpad Modena 2	621 Points -24%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	618 Points -24%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	831 Points +2%
UMI Max	1239 Points +52%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	124 Points
LG K8 2017	Points -100%
Vernee Mars	425 Points +243%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	81 Points -35%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	127 Points +2%
UMI Max	421 Points +240%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	100 Points
LG K8 2017	Points -100%
Vernee Mars	356 Points +256%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	65 Points -35%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	102 Points +2%
UMI Max	354 Points +254%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	835 Points
LG K8 2017	Points -100%
Vernee Mars	1338 Points +60%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	609 Points -27%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	882 Points +6%
UMI Max	1247 Points +49%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	15 fps
LG K8 2017	6.4 fps -57%
Gigaset GS160	11 fps -27%
Vernee Mars	18 fps +20%
Coolpad Modena 2	8.9 fps -41%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	8.2 fps -45%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	8.4 fps -44%
UMI Max	17 fps +13%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	8.4 fps
LG K8 2017	3.4 fps -60%
Gigaset GS160	6 fps -29%
Vernee Mars	17 fps +102%
Coolpad Modena 2	5 fps -40%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	4.9 fps -42%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	14 fps +67%
UMI Max	17 fps +102%

GFXBench 3.0
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	6 fps
LG K8 2017	3.7 fps -38%
Gigaset GS160	4.7 fps -22%
Vernee Mars	7.6 fps +27%
Coolpad Modena 2	4 fps -33%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	1.8 fps -70%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	3 fps -50%
UMI Max	7.1 fps +18%
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	3 fps
LG K8 2017	1.3 fps -57%
Gigaset GS160	2.1 fps -30%
Vernee Mars	7.1 fps +137%
Coolpad Modena 2	1.8 fps -40%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	3.4 fps +13%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	6 fps +100%
UMI Max	7.1 fps +137%

GFXBench 3.1
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	3.4 fps
LG K8 2017	fps -100%
Gigaset GS160	3.4 fps 0%
Vernee Mars	5.1 fps +50%
Coolpad Modena 2	1.2 fps -65%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	1.2 fps -65%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	1.9 fps -44%
UMI Max	4.7 fps +38%
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	1.9 fps
LG K8 2017	fps -100%
Gigaset GS160	1.4 fps -26%
Vernee Mars	4.8 fps +153%
Coolpad Modena 2	2.9 fps +53%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	2.5 fps +32%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	4.4 fps +132%
UMI Max	4.7 fps +147%

PCMark for Android - Work performance score (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	3817 Points
LG K8 2017	4673 Points +22%
Gigaset GS160	2563 Points -33%
Vernee Mars	4554 Points +19%
Coolpad Modena 2	3119 Points -18%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	3813 Points 0%
UMI Max	4485 Points +18%

BaseMark OS II
Overall (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	567 Points
LG K8 2017	371 Points -35%
Gigaset GS160	178 Points -69%
Vernee Mars	348 Points -39%
Coolpad Modena 2	483 Points -15%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	448 Points -21%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	192 Points -66%
UMI Max	341 Points -40%
System (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	1091 Points
LG K8 2017	1191 Points +9%
Gigaset GS160	1029 Points -6%
Vernee Mars	2291 Points +110%
Coolpad Modena 2	909 Points -17%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	801 Points -27%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	1090 Points 0%
UMI Max	2123 Points +95%
Memory (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	552 Points
LG K8 2017	634 Points +15%
Gigaset GS160	497 Points -10%
Vernee Mars	1005 Points +82%
Coolpad Modena 2	598 Points +8%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	487 Points -12%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	450 Points -18%
UMI Max	998 Points +81%
Graphics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	280 Points
LG K8 2017	436 Points +56%
Gigaset GS160	208 Points -26%
Vernee Mars	665 Points +138%
Coolpad Modena 2	178 Points -36%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	174 Points -38%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	286 Points +2%
UMI Max	666 Points +138%
Web (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	639 Points
LG K8 2017	616 Points -4%
Gigaset GS160	9 Points -99%
Vernee Mars	10 Points -98%
Coolpad Modena 2	565 Points -12%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	592 Points -7%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	10 Points -98%
UMI Max	10 Points -98%

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	17.89 Points
LG K8 2017	17.12 Points -4%
Gigaset GS160	14.43 Points -19%
Vernee Mars	27.1 Points +51%
Coolpad Modena 2	13.15 Points -26%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	12.73 Points -29%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	18.03 Points +1%
UMI Max	25.5 Points +43%

Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	2910 Points
LG K8 2017	3052 Points +5%
Gigaset GS160	2493 Points -14%
Vernee Mars	4073 Points +40%
Coolpad Modena 2	1975 Points -32%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	1910 Points -34%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	2697 Points -7%
UMI Max	4231 Points +45%

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (sort by value)
Sony Xperia E5	13232 ms *
LG K8 2017	10742 ms * +19%
Gigaset GS160	13907 ms * -5%
Vernee Mars	9376 ms * +29%
Coolpad Modena 2	19647 ms * -48%
ZTE Blade V7 Lite	19234 ms * -45%
Acer Liquid Zest Plus	12910 ms * +2%
UMI Max	9796 ms * +26%

Legend

Sony Xperia E5 Mediatek MT6735, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

LG K8 2017 Qualcomm Snapdragon 425 (MSM8917), Qualcomm Adreno 308, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Gigaset GS160 Mediatek MT6737, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Vernee Mars Mediatek Helio P10 MT6755, ARM Mali-T860 MP2, 32 GB eMMC Flash

Coolpad Modena 2 Mediatek MT6735, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

ZTE Blade V7 Lite Mediatek MT6735, ARM Mali-T720, 16 GB eMMC Flash

Acer Liquid Zest Plus Mediatek MT6735, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

UMI Max Mediatek Helio P10 MT6755, ARM Mali-T860 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash

* ... smaller is better

Max. Load

Idle


44 °C	41.1 °C	35.3 °C
42.6 °C	43.3 °C	36.9 °C
41.8 °C	43 °C	35.5 °C

Maximum: 44 °C
Average: 40.4 °C


35.9 °C	38.7 °C	45.6 °C
34.4 °C	41 °C	45.6 °C
34 °C	39.2 °C	44.2 °C

Maximum: 45.6 °C
Average: 39.8 °C

Power Supply (max.) 30.8 °C | Room Temperature 21.5 °C | Voltcraft IR-260

(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 40.4 °C / 105 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 44 °C / 111 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 45.6 °C / 114 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 31.6 °C / 89 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.

Sony Xperia E5 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (76.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.5% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.5% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (9.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (30.1% 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%

Coolpad Modena 2 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 40.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 7.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.8% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (2.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (30.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 76% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 19% 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%

LG K8 2017 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 38.8% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 13.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (14.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.1% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (34.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 83% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 16% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 92% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 6% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Power Consumption

Off / Standby	0.01 / 0.34 Watt
Idle	1.03 / 2.06 / 2.12 Watt
Load	5.01 / 5.04 Watt


Key: min: , med: , max: Metrahit Energy

	Sony Xperia E5 2300 mAh	LG K8 2017 2500 mAh	Gigaset GS160 2500 mAh	Vernee Mars 3000 mAh	Coolpad Modena 2 2500 mAh	ZTE Blade V7 Lite 2500 mAh	Acer Liquid Zest Plus 5000 mAh	UMI Max 4000 mAh
Power Consumption		28%	19%	2%	8%	34%	12%	27%
Idle Minimum *	1.03	0.65 37%	0.56 46%	1.02 1%	0.64 38%	0.63 39%	0.83 19%	1.02 1%
Idle Average *	2.06	1.6 22%	1.7 17%	1.69 18%	1.96 5%	1.37 33%	2.06 -0%	1.53 26%
Idle Maximum *	2.12	1.62 24%	1.75 17%	1.82 14%	1.98 7%	1.71 19%	2.08 2%	1.62 24%
Load Average *	5.01	2.97 41%	4.17 17%	4.39 12%	4.99 -0%	2.82 44%	3.53 30%	2.91 42%
Load Maximum *	5.04	4.34 14%	5.07 -1%	6.79 -35%	5.48 -9%	3.36 33%	4.49 11%	2.93 42%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime


WiFi Websurfing		7h 02min

	Sony Xperia E5 2300 mAh	LG K8 2017 2500 mAh	Gigaset GS160 2500 mAh	Vernee Mars 3000 mAh	Coolpad Modena 2 2500 mAh	ZTE Blade V7 Lite 2500 mAh	Acer Liquid Zest Plus 5000 mAh	UMI Max 4000 mAh
Battery Runtime
WiFi v1.3	422	594 41%	615 46%	427 1%	518 23%	517 23%	815 93%	588 39%

Pros

+ 高亮度的IPS面板

+ 精确的GPS模块

+ 性能（考虑到系统芯片）

+ NFC

+ 设计和做工

+ 快速SD卡插槽

Cons

- 缓慢的系统芯片

- 部分地方偏热

- 扬声器

- 电池续航（与竞争对手相比）

- 摄像头

In the test: Sony Xperia E5. Test unit provided by notebooksbilliger.de

在我们的测试中，索尼的入门机在高对比度IPS HD面板和便携性方面得分。Xperia E5做工不错，带有一个，虽然看起来很薄但还不错的塑料外壳。而它的对手则用玻璃(UHANS S1)或金属 (Vernee Mars) ，因此有高质量的感觉。

低性能 MediaTek quad-core 系统芯片和1.5 GB 内存的结合保证了(让人出乎意料地)系统顺畅度, 由于相对高速的16 GB eMMC 存储, 应用程序的打开不太花时间。另外，Xperia E5 的GPS定位能力在同等价位产品中很出众。

我们给以下方面负面评价：由于相对较高的功耗和发热，索尼智能手机的续航时间比竞争对手低。此外，摄像头和扬声器的质量不算好。

Xperia E5是低价位机型中，您坚实的日常伴侣。然而，如果应用索尼高价格段Xperia智能手机才拥有的精妙玻璃设计，或许可以让入门级设备拥有独一无二的特质。

注：本文是基于完整评测的缩减版本，阅读完整的英文评测，请点击这里。

Sony Xperia E5 - 2017-06-06 06/06/2017 v6 ^(old)
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis

80%

Keyboard

60 / 75 → 79%

Pointing Device

84%

Connectivity

41 / 60 → 68%

Weight

93%

Battery

89%

Display

83%

Games Performance

8 / 63 → 13%

Application Performance

34 / 70 → 49%

Temperature

86%

Noise

100%

Audio

48 / 91 → 52%

Camera

48%

Average

66%

77%

Smartphone - Weighted Average

Price comparison

Please share our article, every link counts!

> Notebookcheck中文版（NBC中国） > 评测 > 索尼 Xperia E5 智能手机简短评测

Marcus Herbrich, 2017-06-10 (Update: 2017-06-11)

Size Comparison

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

Display Response Times

Sony Xperia E5 audio analysis

Coolpad Modena 2 audio analysis

LG K8 2017 audio analysis

Pros

Cons

More articles related to this device

Price comparison