vivo X Fold3 智能手机评测：突破物理极限的超轻 8 英寸可折叠手机
vivo X Fold3 是市场上最薄、最轻的可折叠手机之一。X Fold2 的后继机型重量比前一代减少了 61 克，但有趣的是，其电池容量却大大增加，达到了 5500 毫安时。虽然 vivo 无法超越物理极限，但在短短一年时间里，这仍然是一个惊人的发展。
X Fold3 基于 骁龙 8 第二代- 最新的骁龙 8 代 3 SoC 仅用于 专业版的可折叠系列中使用。作为一款进口机型，vivo X Fold3（零售价：6999 日元起，约合 700 欧元）的 16 GB 内存和 256 GB 存储版本在我们的租赁提供商处的起价为 1150 欧元。
vivo 尚未就 X Fold3 系列的全球发布发表评论，但有传言称，这款可折叠手机最终将登陆欧洲。
潜在的竞争对手比较
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Drive | Size | Resolution | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 88.8 % v7 (old) | 05 / 2024 | Vivo X Fold3 SD 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740 | 219 g | 1 TB UFS 4.0 Flash | 8.03" | 2480x2200 | |
| 89.1 % v7 (old) | 08 / 2023 | Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 SD 8 Gen 2 for Galaxy, Adreno 740 | 253 g | 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 7.60" | 2176x1812 | |
| 89 % v7 (old) | 02 / 2024 | Honor Magic V2 SD 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740 | 231 g | 512 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 7.92" | 2344x2156 | |
| 87.3 % v7 (old) | 11 / 2023 | Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 SD 8 Gen 2, Adreno 740 | 259 g | 512 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 8.03" | 2160x1916 | |
| 84.7 % v7 (old) | 08 / 2023 | Google Pixel Fold Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7 | 283 g | 256 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | 7.60" | 2208x1840 |
外壳 - vivo X Fold3 非常轻巧
X Fold3 的重量仅为 219 克，对于一款 8.03 英寸的可折叠智能手机来说非常轻巧，厚度不到 4.7 毫米。A Galaxy Z Fold5为例，其重量比 Z Fold5 重 34 克，电池容量也小了 1100 毫安时。
不过，vivo 的重量规格并不包括 X Fold3 的内外屏幕保护膜--这些保护膜加起来重达 225 克。由于不建议取下工厂贴在内侧屏幕上的保护膜，因此 219 克的规格更多是理论上的。
这款折叠手机的做工质量一流，但手感可能需要更高级一些，因为背面摸起来像廉价塑料，稍微按压就会出现问题。得益于 OLED 面板外围的窄边设计，85.3% 的屏占比对于一款可折叠手机来说相当合适。
X Fold3 内部的屏占比更高，达到 90.5%。没有官方 IP 认证。有一个声音和静音配置文件的专用按钮（静音滑块）。
功能特点配备 UFS 4.0 的 X Fold3
vivo X Fold3 有四种不同的 SKU（12 GB 至 16 GB 内存，256 GB 至 1 TB UFS 4.0 内存）。除蓝牙 5.3 外，还包括红外触发器、NFC、Miracast 和 USB OTG。通过 USB 接口进行的数据传输基于 3.2 Gen 2 标准，也可进行图像传输。
在测试中，我们无法确定 USB 端口的具体传输速度，因为我们的外置硬盘因能源管理限制而无法运行。支持 Microsoft Windows 使用的 exFAT 和 NTFS 文件系统。
软件：vivo X Fold3 与Android 14
在中国推出的 X Fold3 使用的是该公司自己的 Origin OS 4，它基于Android 14，支持包括德语在内的多种语言。目前尚不清楚 vivo 打算在多长时间内通过 OTA 更新支持其高端折叠手机。据推测，这属于 X100 Pro的范围内，它将获得三个主要Android 版本和三年的安全补丁。在我们测试时，安全补丁的日期是 2024 年 3 月。
如果 X100 Pro 也在欧洲推出全球版本，那么它将不会使用 Origin OS 4，而是 Funtouch OS 14。Funtouch OS 14 看起来并不现代，但与中国版不同的是，它没有预装中国应用程序和服务，谷歌应用程序可以在出厂前使用。
不过，Origin OS 也可以通过内部的 V Appstore 获取谷歌应用，随后可以顺利安装和使用 Google Play Store。中国版本的一大优势是更新速度更快。
通信和全球导航卫星系统：X Fold3 支持 5G
为了连接移动数据网络，X Fold3 可以依靠覆盖范围相当广的 5G 和 4G 频率。这款手机可接入总共 17 个 5G 频段和 22 个 LTE 频段。中国版本覆盖了与德语国家有关的所有 4G 频率，频段 20 和频段 28 也在其中。这意味着，没有任何东西会因为网络相关原因而阻碍潜在的进口。
这款可折叠手机拥有现代的 Wi-Fi 7，可用于 WLAN 连接。使用我们的参考路由器华硕 ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000，5 GHz 范围内的平均传输速率约为 1,000 MBit/s。不过，X Fold 3 不支持 6 GHz 频道的连接，因此传输速率低于 Wi-Fi 6E 竞争产品。
| Networking | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| Honor Magic V2 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| Average of class Smartphone | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
X Fold3 可以使用双频全球卫星网络确定自己的位置。在一次自行车骑行中，我们将其定位质量与 Garmin Venu 2 进行了比较。虽然我们在 vivo Phone 上确定的总距离与 Garmin 手表相同，但在详细路线上可以看到一些小误差。
尽管 vivo X Fold3 可以毫不犹豫地用于导航任务，但总体而言 Venu 2 更加精确。
电话功能和语音质量带有 Wi-Fi 通话功能的 X Fold3
vivo 的这款双卡智能手机支持通过 Wi-Fi 网络（Wi-Fi 通话）进行通话，但不支持 eSIM 卡。
通过听筒通话的音质非常好，内置麦克风能将声音清晰地传递给我们的通话伙伴。
摄像头X Fold3 配备三组 5000 万像素摄像头
正如你对可折叠手机的期望一样，X Fold3 有一个前置摄像头和一个内置摄像头。两者的分辨率均为 3200 万像素，光圈均为 f/2.4。拍摄效果非常均衡，相当不错--即使在阳光下，两个镜头的曝光效果也非常完美。
如果条件允许，您还可以将后置摄像头模块和前面板作为取景器使用，打开折叠屏后就能获得最佳的自拍效果。
具体来说，你可以从与蔡司合作优化的三个 5000 万像素摄像头中进行选择。主摄像头基于索尼 IMX920，具有 OIS 功能。其和谐的动态范围和令人满意的锐度给人留下了深刻印象。
我们还发现 X Fold3 的色彩还原非常好，尽管绿色调可能会有些失真。对于一款可折叠智能手机来说，低光性能的吸引力尤其值得强调。
另外两个 5000 万像素镜头的质量明显逊色。长焦镜头有点令人失望；我们希望在变焦水平超过两倍无损放大时能看到更多细节。
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.
WeitwinkelWeitwinkelLow LightUltraweitwinkelZoom 5x
配件和保修：vivo X Fold3 随附电源适配器
交货范围包括一条 USB 线缆、一个高质量的兽皮外观保护套和一个带 A 型插头的 80 W 模块化电源适配器。TradingShenzhen 还为该地区使用的插座提供了一个欧盟适配器，但这不属于标准交货范围，而是租赁公司提供的一项服务。
Vivo 提供 12 个月的 保修期保修期。就我们从 TradingShenzhen 购买的测试设备而言，如果需要保修，也可以将 X Fold3 寄往德国的收货地址。
不过，vivo 欧洲公司过去曾向我们确认，如果设备在欧洲正式销售，在国外购买的机型也可以在德国进行保修索赔。
输入设备和操作X Fold3 支持面部解锁
电容式触摸屏反应迅速，两块屏幕上都贴有保护膜。8.03 英寸内屏上的保护膜不能撕掉，因此你绝不会感觉到你使用的是玻璃表面。得益于 120 Hz 的面板，动画和滚动显示非常流畅。
X Fold3 还支持三星的 "柔性模式"，在部分折叠时提供扩展屏幕选项，而且铰链设计相当稳定。一个小型线性电动马达（X 轴）负责振动。这提供了清晰的触觉反馈。
生物识别安全通过两个采用 2D 技术的 3200 万像素摄像头的面部解锁功能或开关按钮上的指纹传感器来确保。该传感器工作非常可靠，可以快速解锁 vivo 可折叠手机。
显示屏没有恼人折痕的 vivo X Fold3
作为一款经典的可折叠智能手机，它有两块显示屏，可以让人眼前一亮。内部的柔性 AMOLED 面板尺寸为 8.03 英寸，纵横比为 4:3.55。vivo 成功地确保了屏幕中央的显示屏折痕在日常生活中几乎看不出来，只有在反光的情况下才会真正显现出来。
在我们的测量中，X Fold3 的峰值亮度达到 2,589 cd/m²（APL 18）。如果在 8.03 英寸显示屏上观看支持 HDR 的视频，亮度可达 4,757 cd/m²。
21.1:9 格式的外置显示屏尺寸为 6.53 英寸，亮度不及内置显示屏。不过，较高的外置显示屏在测试中达到了非常出色的 2322 cd/m²（APL 18）和 3322 cd/m²（视频内容）。
由于屏幕采用 OLED 技术，vivo 智能手机也未能幸免 PWM 导致的闪烁。外部面板的工作频率恒定在 120 Hz，而 8.03 英寸显示屏的 PWM 频率则随着亮度的增加而增加--我们测得的频率在 240 Hz 到 480 Hz 之间。
不过，根据制造商的说法，X Fold3 使用的是高频 PWM 调光（内屏：1920 赫兹，外屏：2160 赫兹）。我们测量到的较低的基本闪烁也可能是 BFI（黑框插入）造成的。
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 99 %
Center on Battery: 1793 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 0.9 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92
ΔE Greyscale 1.6 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
96.9% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.2
| Vivo X Fold3 AMOLED, 2480x2200, 8" | Vivo X Fold3 2748x1172, 6.5" | Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 Dynamic AMOLED, 2176x1812, 7.6" | Honor Magic V2 OLED, 2344x2156, 7.9" | Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 AMOLED, 2160x1916, 8" | Google Pixel Fold OLED, 2208x1840, 7.6" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | -51% | -85% | -5% | -7% | -39% | |
| Brightness middle | 1793 | 1580 -12% | 1104 -38% | 961 -46% | 1307 -27% | 993 -45% |
| Brightness | 1806 | 1585 -12% | 1107 -39% | 950 -47% | 1308 -28% | 997 -45% |
| Brightness Distribution | 99 | 94 -5% | 97 -2% | 97 -2% | 96 -3% | 94 -5% |
| Black Level * | ||||||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 0.9 | 1.5 -67% | 3.1 -244% | 0.8 11% | 1 -11% | 1.4 -56% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 2.1 | 4.1 -95% | 4.2 -100% | 1.5 29% | 1.7 19% | 3.2 -52% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.6 | 3.4 -113% | 3 -88% | 1.2 25% | 1.5 6% | 2.1 -31% |
| Gamma | 2.2 100% | 2.38 92% | 2.01 109% | 2.23 99% | 2.24 98% | 2.24 98% |
| CCT | 6595 99% | 6700 97% | 6594 99% | 6396 102% | 6313 103% | 6796 96% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 240 Hz Amplitude: 50.96 % |  | |
The display backlight flickers at 240 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 240 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below. 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. | |||
具有固定缩放级别和不同亮度设置的测量系列 (可折叠显示屏；信息：最低亮度下的振幅曲线看起来很平，但这是由于缩放造成的。信息框显示的是最小亮度下的振幅放大图）
具有固定缩放级别和不同亮度设置的测量系列 (外部显示；信息最低亮度下的振幅曲线看起来很平，但这是缩放造成的。信息框显示的是最小亮度下振幅的放大版本）。
我们使用 Portrait Displays 公司的 Calman Ultimate 分析软件对 OLED 面板进行了色彩校准。在 "专业 "配置文件和 "标准 "白平衡中，sRGB 色彩空间得到了控制并基本覆盖。
我们使用 X-Rite 分光光度计测量的结果是，内部显示屏的平均 delta E 偏差非常低，分别为 0.9（ColorChecker）和 1.8（Grayscale）。
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1.15 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.6255 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 0.524 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. » 3 % 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 | ||
| 2.69 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 1.398 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 1.289 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. » 9 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms). | ||
在户外，X Fold3 的两块显示屏都给人留下了深刻印象，其亮度储备足以应对大多数光线环境。视角稳定性也非常好。
性能配备骁龙 8 代 2 处理器的 X Fold3
这款可折叠智能手机的性能来自于快速的 骁龙 8 代 2芯片，该芯片在 Geekbench CPU 基准测试中表现出色。特别是在多核方面，X Fold3 比其他高通竞争产品具有更强的性能。 高通竞争产品.
不过，在系统测试中，vivo X Fold3 的表现稍弱。图形基准测试也是如此。在这里 Adreno 740似乎受到散热问题和节流效应的负面影响，尤其是在 GFXBench 层级测试中。
在我们的 AndroBench 基准测试中，UFS 4.0 内存达到了非常高的数值。1 TB 选项的写入速度尤为突出。
| Antutu v10 - Total Score | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (1398472 - 1607558, n=12) | |
| Honor Magic V2 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Average of class Smartphone (142748 - 3015111, n=98, last 2 years) | |
| UL Procyon AI Inference for Android - Overall Score NNAPI | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| Average of class Smartphone (1267 - 74958, n=143, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (11338 - 16880, n=21) | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Honor Magic V2 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| AImark - Score v3.x | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (941 - 173234, n=18) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (82 - 307528, n=135, last 2 years) | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
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 | 3840x2160 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
| 3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Honor Magic V2 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| 3DMark / Wild Life Extreme | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Honor Magic V2 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| 3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Honor Magic V2 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| 3DMark / Wild Life Score | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| Honor Magic V2 | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| 3DMark / Solar Bay Score | |
| Honor Magic V2 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| 3DMark / Solar Bay Unlimited Score | |
| Honor Magic V2 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| GFXBench / 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 (Chrome 115) | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 (Chrome 118.0.05993.111) | |
| Vivo X Fold3 (Chrome 124) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (62.7 - 179.2, n=23) | |
| Honor Magic V2 (Chrome 120) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=161, last 2 years) | |
| Google Pixel Fold (Chrome 115) | |
| Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 (Chrome 118.0.05993.111) | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (62.9 - 225, n=18) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=146, last 2 years) | |
| Google Pixel Fold (Chrome 115) | |
| WebXPRT 4 - Overall | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 (Chrome 115) | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 (Chrome 118.0.05993.111) | |
| Vivo X Fold3 (Chrome 124) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (28 - 183, n=22) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (22 - 271, n=152, last 2 years) | |
| Honor Magic V2 (Chrome 121) | |
| Google Pixel Fold (Chrome 115) | |
| WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 (Chrome 118.0.05993.111) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (115 - 238, n=11) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (38 - 347, n=79, last 2 years) | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 (Chrome 118.0.05993.111) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 (Chrome 115) | |
| Vivo X Fold3 (Chrome 124) | |
| Honor Magic V2 (Chrome 120) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (19870 - 65418, n=25) | |
| Google Pixel Fold (Chrome 115) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=203, last 2 years) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=160, last 2 years) | |
| Google Pixel Fold (Chrome 115) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 (602 - 1837, n=22) | |
| Honor Magic V2 (Chrome 120) | |
| Vivo X Fold3 (Chrome 124) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 (Chrome 115) | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 (Chrome 118.0.05993.111) | |
* ... smaller is better
| Vivo X Fold3 | Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | Honor Magic V2 | Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | Google Pixel Fold | Average 1 TB UFS 4.0 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -11% | 6% | -1% | -53% | 7% | -42% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 3556.73 | 4384.43 23% | 3401.13 -4% | 3572.73 0% | 1606.37 -55% | 3543 ? 0% | 1839 ? -48% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 3076.11 | 2449.23 -20% | 3136.56 2% | 2897.27 -6% | 1169.32 -62% | 3353 ? 9% | 1425 ? -54% |
| Random Read 4KB | 387.96 | 459.94 19% | 444.78 15% | 389.81 0% | 219.11 -44% | 397 ? 2% | 277 ? -29% |
| Random Write 4KB | 486.21 | 161.39 -67% | 533.65 10% | 506.41 4% | 238.72 -51% | 572 ? 18% | 309 ? -36% |
排放：vivo X Fold3 出现热节流现象
温度
在负载情况下，某些点的表面温度非常高，但平均温度仍可归类为低温。我们使用 3DMark 压力测试来检查内部的发热情况。在这里 高通 SoC在计算密集型负载下的帧速率波动较大。
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 48.1 °C / 119 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 42.2 °C / 108 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.4 °C / 80 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
3DMark Wild Life Stress Test
| 3DMark | |
| Wild Life Stress Test Stability | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| Honor Magic V2 | |
| Wild Life Extreme Stress Test | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
| Honor Magic V2 | |
| Solar Bay Stress Test Stability | |
| Honor Magic V2 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
扬声器
X Fold3 的两个扬声器提供了良好的声音输出，即使超高音调有些力不从心。另一方面，扬声器还能发出有深度的低音。
有线耳机可通过 USB 端口连接。喜欢使用蓝牙进行无线输出的用户可以选择多种编解码器（SBC、AAC、aptX + HD + Adaptive、LDAC、LHDC V5、LC3 和 Opus）。
Vivo X Fold3 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (89 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 6% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (1.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 19% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 72% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 40% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.2% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 14% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 77% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 37%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 36% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 56% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
电池续航时间vivo X Fold3 电池续航时间长
能耗
尽管外壳很薄，但 vivo X Fold3 的电池总容量为 5,500 mAh（3,020 mAh + 2,480 mAh，3.86 V），最大充电功率为 80 W。使用合适的电源适配器充电只需不到 40 分钟。
我们测量了 X Fold 3 在大尺寸主屏幕下的功耗。对于一款可折叠的 XXL 手机来说，负载功耗相对较低，约为 6.5 W。
| Off / Standby |   0.04 / 0.41 Watt |
| Idle |  0.91 / 1.61 / 1.7 Watt |
| Load |
6.36 / 11.26 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Vivo X Fold3 5500 mAh | Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 4400 mAh | Honor Magic V2 5000 mAh | Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 4800 mAh | Google Pixel Fold 4821 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 16% | -26% | -24% | -10% | -9% | 6% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.91 | 0.55 40% | 1.31 -44% | 0.86 5% | 0.86 5% | 1.036 ? -14% | 0.894 ? 2% |
| Idle Average * | 1.61 | 0.9 44% | 1.99 -24% | 1.05 35% | 1.7 -6% | 1.766 ? -10% | 1.456 ? 10% |
| Idle Maximum * | 1.7 | 1 41% | 2.15 -26% | 1.07 37% | 1.8 -6% | 1.94 ? -14% | 1.616 ? 5% |
| Load Average * | 6.36 | 9.58 -51% | 8.92 -40% | 15.27 -140% | 9.1 -43% | 7.22 ? -14% | 6.45 ? -1% |
| Load Maximum * | 11.26 | 10.74 5% | 11.05 2% | 17.78 -58% | 11.06 2% | 10.4 ? 8% | 9.8 ? 13% |
* ... smaller is better
Power consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)
Power consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)
电池寿命
X Fold3 配备 8.03 英寸显示屏，显示屏亮度调整为 150 cd/m²，电池续航时间为 12.5 小时，与 ZFold5 不相上下。 Galaxy ZFold5.在亮度均匀的情况下进行比较。在外部面板较小的情况下，我们的续航时间约为 19 小时。
| Battery Runtime - WiFi v1.3 | |
| Vivo X Fold3 | |
| Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 | |
| Honor Magic V2 | |
| Xiaomi Mix Fold 3 | |
| Google Pixel Fold | |
Pros
Cons
结论轻巧实用的可折叠设备
通过 vivo X Fold3，这家中国制造商创造了一款非常有趣的可折叠智能手机。与高端竞争产品（如 小米 14 Ultra.
这些限制包括缺乏 IP 认证、长焦镜头和超广角镜头较弱以及没有无线充电功能。去年的 骁龙 8 代 2芯片组也不是最先进的，尽管它在性能方面仍然无可挑剔。
如果你能接受这些批评意见，你就会发现这款迷你平板电脑非常轻巧，手感舒适，重 219 克，厚度仅为 4.65 毫米，薄得令人难以置信。值得肯定的是，vivo 还成功地将显示屏的折痕降到了最低，这意味着在日常生活中几乎看不到可折叠的 OLED 屏幕。
与 Honor Magic V2相比，X Fold3 的两块 LTPO 面板在亮度方面也达到了目前的旗舰水平。
通过 X Fold3，vivo 开启了可折叠领域的新纪元。它比传统手机更轻，但仍拥有 8.03 英寸的大面板。
X Fold3 的其他替代产品有 小米混合折叠 3或 三星Galaxy Z Fold5但这些手机的重量级与 vivo 手机不同。
价格和供应情况
vivo X Fold3 的进口售价约为 1,150 欧元（1,250 美元），由深圳贸易公司提供。
Vivo X Fold3
- 05/15/2024 v7 (old)
Marcus Herbrich
Transparency
The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was provided to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or retailer for the purpose of this review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review. We never accept compensation or payment in return for our reviews. As an independent media company, Notebookcheck is not subjected to the authority of manufacturers, retailers or publishers.
This is how Notebookcheck is testing
Every year, Notebookcheck independently reviews hundreds of laptops and smartphones using standardized procedures to ensure that all results are comparable. We have continuously developed our test methods for around 20 years and set industry standards in the process. In our test labs, high-quality measuring equipment is utilized by experienced technicians and editors. These tests involve a multi-stage validation process. Our complex rating system is based on hundreds of well-founded measurements and benchmarks, which maintains objectivity. Further information on our test methods can be found here.
Price comparison
