Breve Análise do Smartphone Apple iPhone XR

Daniel Schmidt, 👁 Daniel Schmidt (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), 10/30/2018

Live Review – A Apple posiciona o iPhone XR entre os dois modelos XS em termos de tamanho, mas equipa o dispositivo com uma tela LCD de resolução mais baixa e apenas uma câmera traseira. Existem alguns outros pequenos inconvenientes, mas o XR faz o suficiente para ser coroado como o melhor iPhone em geral? Continue lendo para descobrir.

Apple iPhone XR (iPhone Serie)

Processador

Apple A12 Bionic

Placa gráfica

Apple A12 Bionic GPU

Memória

3072 MB

, LPDDR4x

Pantalha

6.1 polegadas 19.5:9, 1792 x 828 pixel 324 PPI, Tela táctil capacitiva, multitouch de dez pontos, IPS, Brilhante: sim

Disco rígido

128 GB NVMe, 128 GB

, 116.93 GB livre

Conexões

1 USB 2.0, Conexões Audio: Lightning, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensores: Giroscópio de 3 eixos, Acelerômetro, Barômetro, Bússola digital, Face ID, Sensor de Proximidade, Lightning-Port, eSIM, Galileo, QZSS

Funcionamento em rede

802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM/GPRS/EDGE: 850, 900, 1,800, 1,900 MHz. UMTS/HSPA+: 850, 900, 1,700/2,100, 1,900, 2,100 MHz. LTE: FDD Bands – 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 32, 66; TDD Bands – 34, 38, 39, 40, 41., Dual SIM, LTE, GPS

Tamanho

altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 8.3 x 150.9 x 75.7

Bateria

11.16 Wh, 2942 mAh Lítio-Ion, 3.79 V, Tempo de conversação 3G (de acordo com o fabricante): 25 h

Sistema Operativo

Apple iOS 12

Camera

Primary Camera: 12 MPix Wide angle: f/1.8, 1.4 μm, Focus Pixel, 6 lens elements, OIS, True Tone Flash, UHD Video at up to 60 FPS
Secondary Camera: 7 MPix f/2.2, Full HD em até 60 FPS

Características adicionais

Alto falantes: Alto-falantes estéreo, Teclado: Teclado virtual, Charger, cabo Lighting, Fones, Guia de início rápido, Adesivo Apple, SIM tool, 12 Meses Garantia, Head SAR value: 0.99 W/kg, IP67 certified, Qi wireless charging, fanless

peso

194 g, Suprimento de energia: 46 g

Preço

909 Euro

Links

Apple página inicial

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

see all specifications

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Pocophone F1 Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	675 (min: 630, max: 704) MBit/s ∼100% +31%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Mali-G72 MP18, 9810, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	652 MBit/s ∼97% +26%
Apple iPhone XS A12 Bionic GPU, A12 Bionic, Apple 512 GB (iPhone Xs)	650 MBit/s ∼96% +26%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	615 (min: 532, max: 642) MBit/s ∼91% +19%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	491 (min: 100, max: 534) MBit/s ∼73% -5%
Apple iPhone XR A12 Bionic GPU, A12 Bionic, 128 GB NVMe	517 (min: 477, max: 528) MBit/s ∼77%
Average of class Smartphone (5.9 - 939, n=409)	222 MBit/s ∼33% -57%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei Mate 20 Pro Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	696 (min: 647, max: 714) MBit/s ∼100% +8%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	663 (min: 289, max: 805) MBit/s ∼95% +3%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1 Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	647 (min: 598, max: 665) MBit/s ∼93% 0%
Apple iPhone XR A12 Bionic GPU, A12 Bionic, 128 GB NVMe	644 (min: 578, max: 672) MBit/s ∼93%
Apple iPhone XS A12 Bionic GPU, A12 Bionic, Apple 512 GB (iPhone Xs)	587 MBit/s ∼84% -9%
Samsung Galaxy S9 Mali-G72 MP18, 9810, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	519 MBit/s ∼75% -19%
Average of class Smartphone (9.4 - 703, n=409)	212 MBit/s ∼30% -67%

Os Top 10

» Os Top 10 Portáteis Multimídia
» Os Top 10 Portáteis de Jogos
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Leves para Jogos
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Acessíveis de Escritório/Empresariais
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Premium de Escritório/Empresariais
» Os Top 10 dos Portáteis Workstation
» Os Top 10 Subportáteis
» Os Top 10 Ultrabooks
» Os Top 10 Conversíveis
» Os Top 10 Tablets
» Os Top 10 Smartphones
» A melhores Telas de Portáteis Analisadas Pela Notebookcheck
» Top 10 dos portáteis abaixo dos 500 Euros da Notebookcheck
» Top 10 dos Portáteis abaixo dos 300 Euros

; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø516 (477-528)

; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø644 (578-672)

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: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9447 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) 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
20 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 6.8 ms rise
20 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 13.2 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 21 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.1 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
45.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 21.2 ms rise
45.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 24.4 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 71 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (40.1 ms).

Geekbench 4.3
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	21070 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S9	6219 Points ∼30% -70%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	14369 Points ∼68% -32%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	8938 Points ∼42% -58%
Average Apple A12 Bionic	21070 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (663 - 21070, n=309)	4566 Points ∼22% -78%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	11276 Points ∼97%
Apple iPhone XS	11598 Points ∼100% +3%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus	10558 Points ∼91% -6%
Samsung Galaxy S9	8786 Points ∼76% -22%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	9182 Points ∼79% -19%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	10024 Points ∼86% -11%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (11244 - 11598, n=5)	11418 Points ∼98% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (1174 - 11598, n=364)	4554 Points ∼39% -60%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	4750 Points ∼98%
Apple iPhone XS	4824 Points ∼100% +2%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus	4263 Points ∼88% -10%
Samsung Galaxy S9	3688 Points ∼76% -22%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	2468 Points ∼51% -48%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	3378 Points ∼70% -29%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (4750 - 4824, n=5)	4779 Points ∼99% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (691 - 4824, n=366)	1356 Points ∼28% -71%

PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9	5291 Points ∼57%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	8101 Points ∼88%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	9225 Points ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone (3227 - 11440, n=359)	5004 Points ∼54%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy S9	5736 Points ∼46%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	9664 Points ∼77%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	12535 Points ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone (4096 - 14439, n=527)	5476 Points ∼44%

3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	3030 Points ∼69%
Apple iPhone XS	2998 Points ∼69% -1%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus	2187 Points ∼50% -28%
Samsung Galaxy S9	2590 Points ∼59% -15%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	2257 Points ∼52% -26%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	4364 Points ∼100% +44%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (2723 - 3347, n=5)	3060 Points ∼70% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (573 - 4535, n=374)	1832 Points ∼42% -40%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	5061 Points ∼93%
Apple iPhone XS	5139 Points ∼94% +2%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus	3325 Points ∼61% -34%
Samsung Galaxy S9	3697 Points ∼68% -27%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	4468 Points ∼82% -12%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	4250 Points ∼78% -16%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (4828 - 6484, n=5)	5443 Points ∼100% +8%
Average of class Smartphone (76 - 8206, n=374)	1597 Points ∼29% -68%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	4405 Points ∼95%
Apple iPhone XS	4436 Points ∼96% +1%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus	2981 Points ∼64% -32%
Samsung Galaxy S9	3376 Points ∼73% -23%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	3669 Points ∼79% -17%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	4275 Points ∼92% -3%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (4121 - 5367, n=5)	4638 Points ∼100% +5%
Average of class Smartphone (94 - 6312, n=377)	1484 Points ∼32% -66%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	2880 Points ∼65%
Apple iPhone XS	2952 Points ∼67% +3%
Samsung Galaxy S9	2650 Points ∼60% -8%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	2832 Points ∼64% -2%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	4407 Points ∼100% +53%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (2880 - 3493, n=5)	3129 Points ∼71% +9%
Average of class Smartphone (375 - 4703, n=388)	1807 Points ∼41% -37%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	14085 Points ∼94%
Apple iPhone XS	14951 Points ∼100% +6%
Samsung Galaxy S9	4843 Points ∼32% -66%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	6898 Points ∼46% -51%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	5854 Points ∼39% -58%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (10374 - 15399, n=5)	13770 Points ∼92% -2%
Average of class Smartphone (131 - 14951, n=388)	2194 Points ∼15% -84%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	7555 Points ∼96%
Apple iPhone XS	7856 Points ∼100% +4%
Samsung Galaxy S9	4091 Points ∼52% -46%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	5230 Points ∼67% -31%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	5456 Points ∼69% -28%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (6667 - 8763, n=5)	7814 Points ∼99% +3%
Average of class Smartphone (159 - 8141, n=389)	1861 Points ∼24% -75%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	3121 Points ∼75%
Apple iPhone XS	2960 Points ∼71% -5%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus	2109 Points ∼50% -32%
Samsung Galaxy S9	2486 Points ∼59% -20%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	2528 Points ∼60% -19%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	4183 Points ∼100% +34%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (2960 - 3312, n=5)	3114 Points ∼74% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (486 - 4320, n=450)	1762 Points ∼42% -44%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	3806 Points ∼80%
Apple iPhone XS	3712 Points ∼78% -2%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus	3069 Points ∼65% -19%
Samsung Galaxy S9	3553 Points ∼75% -7%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	4746 Points ∼100% +25%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	4206 Points ∼89% +11%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (3712 - 5760, n=5)	4389 Points ∼92% +15%
Average of class Smartphone (65 - 6362, n=452)	1324 Points ∼28% -65%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	3629 Points ∼86%
Apple iPhone XS	3514 Points ∼84% -3%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus	2781 Points ∼66% -23%
Samsung Galaxy S9	3244 Points ∼77% -11%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	3972 Points ∼95% +9%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	4201 Points ∼100% +16%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (3514 - 4949, n=5)	4005 Points ∼95% +10%
Average of class Smartphone (80 - 5734, n=460)	1262 Points ∼30% -65%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	2960 Points ∼71%
Apple iPhone XS	Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S9	2600 Points ∼63% -12%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	2720 Points ∼66% -8%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	4150 Points ∼100% +40%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (2713 - 3184, n=5)	2407 Points ∼58% -19%
Average of class Smartphone (512 - 4454, n=482)	1669 Points ∼40% -44%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	7806 Points ∼94%
Apple iPhone XS	Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S9	4569 Points ∼55% -41%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	8261 Points ∼100% +6%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	5305 Points ∼64% -32%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (7055 - 10647, n=5)	7095 Points ∼86% -9%
Average of class Smartphone (43 - 10008, n=482)	1802 Points ∼22% -77%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	5724 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS	Points ∼0% -100%
Samsung Galaxy S9	3911 Points ∼68% -32%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	5687 Points ∼99% -1%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	4996 Points ∼87% -13%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (5205 - 6997, n=5)	4938 Points ∼86% -14%
Average of class Smartphone (55 - 7820, n=490)	1543 Points ∼27% -73%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	27413 Points ∼75%
Apple iPhone XS	27400 Points ∼75% 0%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus	25641 Points ∼70% -6%
Samsung Galaxy S9	26851 Points ∼73% -2%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	34928 Points ∼95% +27%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	36755 Points ∼100% +34%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (27400 - 27717, n=5)	27548 Points ∼75% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (4811 - 45072, n=642)	13649 Points ∼37% -50%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	162695 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS	160199 Points ∼98% -2%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus	113380 Points ∼70% -30%
Samsung Galaxy S9	48433 Points ∼30% -70%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	82125 Points ∼50% -50%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	67730 Points ∼42% -58%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (159735 - 162695, n=5)	160619 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (11358 - 162695, n=642)	20023 Points ∼12% -88%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	77597 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS	77128 Points ∼99% -1%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus	64405 Points ∼83% -17%
Samsung Galaxy S9	41093 Points ∼53% -47%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	63159 Points ∼81% -19%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	57047 Points ∼74% -26%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (77128 - 77626, n=5)	77462 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (11565 - 83518, n=643)	16599 Points ∼21% -79%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	232 fps ∼92%
Apple iPhone XS	251 fps ∼100% +8%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus	166.9 fps ∼66% -28%
Samsung Galaxy S9	144 fps ∼57% -38%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	150 fps ∼60% -35%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	120 fps ∼48% -48%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (226 - 274, n=5)	249 fps ∼99% +7%
Average of class Smartphone (6 - 251, n=670)	35 fps ∼14% -85%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	60 fps ∼50%
Apple iPhone XS	60 fps ∼50% 0%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus	119.4 fps ∼100% +99%
Samsung Galaxy S9	60 fps ∼50% 0%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	60 fps ∼50% 0%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	61 fps ∼51% +2%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (59.5 - 60, n=5)	59.9 fps ∼50% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (9.8 - 120, n=673)	26.9 fps ∼23% -55%

GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	132 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS	115 fps ∼87% -13%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus	71 fps ∼54% -46%
Samsung Galaxy S9	73 fps ∼55% -45%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	71 fps ∼54% -46%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	73 fps ∼55% -45%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (107 - 139, n=5)	123 fps ∼93% -7%
Average of class Smartphone (2.7 - 132, n=589)	19.3 fps ∼15% -85%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	60 fps ∼76%
Apple iPhone XS	60 fps ∼76% 0%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus	79.2 fps ∼100% +32%
Samsung Galaxy S9	45 fps ∼57% -25%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	58 fps ∼73% -3%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	42 fps ∼53% -30%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (58.5 - 60, n=5)	59.3 fps ∼75% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (5.4 - 115, n=594)	17.8 fps ∼22% -70%

GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	88 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS	62 fps ∼70% -30%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus	49 fps ∼56% -44%
Samsung Galaxy S9	46 fps ∼52% -48%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	35 fps ∼40% -60%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	29 fps ∼33% -67%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (62 - 96, n=4)	78.8 fps ∼90% -10%
Average of class Smartphone (1.6 - 88, n=450)	15.9 fps ∼18% -82%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	60 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS	48 fps ∼80% -20%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus	56.4 fps ∼94% -6%
Samsung Galaxy S9	24 fps ∼40% -60%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	54 fps ∼90% -10%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	26 fps ∼43% -57%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (48 - 60, n=4)	54.5 fps ∼91% -9%
Average of class Smartphone (3.4 - 110, n=453)	15.1 fps ∼25% -75%

GFXBench
High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	59 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS	35 fps ∼59% -41%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	22 fps ∼37% -63%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	19 fps ∼32% -68%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (26.4 - 59, n=4)	38.1 fps ∼65% -35%
Average of class Smartphone (0.86 - 59, n=153)	8.93 fps ∼15% -85%
2560x1440 High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	20 fps ∼91%
Apple iPhone XS	22 fps ∼100% +10%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	14 fps ∼64% -30%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	13 fps ∼59% -35%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (16.3 - 26.3, n=4)	21.2 fps ∼96% +6%
Average of class Smartphone (0.26 - 31, n=153)	6.17 fps ∼28% -69%
Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	59 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS	41 fps ∼69% -31%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	31 fps ∼53% -47%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	18 fps ∼31% -69%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (40.4 - 59, n=4)	46.9 fps ∼79% -21%
Average of class Smartphone (1.8 - 59, n=155)	13.4 fps ∼23% -77%
1920x1080 Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	63 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS	48 fps ∼76% -24%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	32 fps ∼51% -49%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	33 fps ∼52% -48%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (36.8 - 70.5, n=4)	54.6 fps ∼87% -13%
Average of class Smartphone (0.94 - 63, n=154)	14.8 fps ∼23% -77%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	54 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS	38 fps ∼70% -30%
Samsung Galaxy S9	28 fps ∼52% -48%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	35 fps ∼65% -35%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	31 fps ∼57% -43%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (38 - 62.8, n=4)	48.7 fps ∼90% -10%
Average of class Smartphone (0.89 - 54, n=379)	10.7 fps ∼20% -80%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	58 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS	31 fps ∼53% -47%
Samsung Galaxy S9	14 fps ∼24% -76%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	33 fps ∼57% -43%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	16 fps ∼28% -72%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (31 - 58, n=4)	39 fps ∼67% -33%
Average of class Smartphone (1.6 - 58, n=383)	9.64 fps ∼17% -83%

Basemark GPU
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	24.51 (min: 11.54, max: 48.55) fps ∼84%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	29.12 (min: 9.74, max: 74.17) fps ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone (2.53 - 37.4, n=61)	15.1 fps ∼52%
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	15.8 (min: 10.44, max: 44.6) fps ∼93%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	16.92 (min: 6.06, max: 28.78) fps ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone (2.91 - 36.2, n=56)	12.1 fps ∼72%
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	21.26 (min: 11.26, max: 61.24) fps ∼83%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	25.57 (min: 7.38, max: 46.96) fps ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone (3.2 - 38.6, n=56)	14.3 fps ∼56%

AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XS	348178 Points ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S9	243861 Points ∼70%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	263165 Points ∼76%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	300617 Points ∼86%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (302955 - 370545, n=4)	347775 Points ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone (52607 - 398720, n=272)	130479 Points ∼37%

AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone 8 Plus	218158 Points ∼87%
Samsung Galaxy S9	217950 Points ∼87%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	227026 Points ∼91%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	250848 Points ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone (23275 - 283270, n=476)	85674 Points ∼34%

VRMark - Amber Room (sort by value)
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	4731 Score ∼94%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	5025 Score ∼100%
Average of class Smartphone (552 - 5025, n=58)	1911 Score ∼38%

BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	1722 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS	1711 Points ∼99% -1%
Samsung Galaxy S9	1099 Points ∼64% -36%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	1296 Points ∼75% -25%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	1424 Points ∼83% -17%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (1711 - 1734, n=5)	1726 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (7 - 1731, n=602)	742 Points ∼43% -57%
Graphics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	15969 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS	15875 Points ∼99% -1%
Samsung Galaxy S9	6373 Points ∼40% -60%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	7945 Points ∼50% -50%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	6273 Points ∼39% -61%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (15614 - 15969, n=5)	15755 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (18 - 15969, n=602)	1943 Points ∼12% -88%
Memory (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	3263 Points ∼52%
Apple iPhone XS	4169 Points ∼66% +28%
Samsung Galaxy S9	2669 Points ∼42% -18%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	3239 Points ∼52% -1%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	6283 Points ∼100% +93%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (1815 - 4169, n=5)	2684 Points ∼43% -18%
Average of class Smartphone (21 - 7500, n=602)	1449 Points ∼23% -56%
System (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	11946 Points ∼98%
Apple iPhone XS	12202 Points ∼100% +2%
Samsung Galaxy S9	6234 Points ∼51% -48%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	6506 Points ∼53% -46%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	8604 Points ∼71% -28%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (11675 - 12591, n=5)	12077 Points ∼99% +1%
Average of class Smartphone (369 - 12202, n=602)	2857 Points ∼23% -76%
Overall (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	5721 Points ∼94%
Apple iPhone XS	6097 Points ∼100% +7%
Samsung Galaxy S9	3285 Points ∼54% -43%
Xiaomi Pocophone F1	3838 Points ∼63% -33%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	4687 Points ∼77% -18%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (4895 - 6097, n=5)	5396 Points ∼89% -6%
Average of class Smartphone (150 - 6097, n=606)	1420 Points ∼23% -75%

Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone XR	2754 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XS	2606 Points ∼95% -5%
Samsung Galaxy S9	1436 Points ∼52% -48%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro	1571 Points ∼57% -43%
Average Apple A12 Bionic (2407 - 2873, n=5)	2680 Points ∼97% -3%
Average of class Smartphone (35 - 2754, n=102)	709 Points ∼26% -74%

Legend

Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, Apple A12 Bionic GPU, 128 GB NVMe

Apple iPhone XS Apple A12 Bionic, Apple A12 Bionic GPU, Apple 512 GB (iPhone Xs)

Apple iPhone 8 Plus Apple A11 Bionic, Apple A11 Bionic GPU, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)

Samsung Galaxy S9 Samsung Exynos 9810, ARM Mali-G72 MP18, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash

Xiaomi Pocophone F1 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash

Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, ARM Mali-G76 MP10, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash

Average Apple A12 Bionic

Average of class Smartphone

O Apple iPhone XR tem muito a ver com isso. Além disso, a tela de resolução mais baixa é um pouco mais segura, já que é efetivamente mais nítida que as telas OLED no XS e no XS Max. Além disso, a tela do XR não possui PWM, que afeta seus irmãos mais caros.

Além disso, é pouco provável que a economia de custos da Apple faça diferença no uso diário, seja na classificação IP mais fraca, no desempenho mais lento de LTE e Wi-Fi ou na menor quantidade de RAM. Esperamos que o único comprometimento perceptível seja a falta do zoom óptico.

Em última análise, o XR deve provar sua bateria antes de podermos recomendar o dispositivo. No entanto, o XR parece uma ótima alternativa para os smartphones mais caros da Apple nas impressões iniciais.

Breve Análise do Smartphone Apple iPhone XR

Size Comparison

Os Top 10

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

Display Response Times

Pricecompare