Notebookcheck

Breve Análise do Smartphone Fairphone 2

Manuel Masiero (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), 12/16/2016

Boa consciência. A Fairphone promove condições de trabalho justas e sustentabilidade em vez de exploração e desperdício. Com o seu design modular, exclusivo no mundo dos smartphones, que a fácil substituição de componentes, o Android de 5 polegadas também tem uma abordagem diferente a seus rivais em todos os outros aspectos.

Fairphone 2
Processador
Qualcomm Snapdragon 801 MSM8974AA
Placa gráfica
Memória
2048 MB 
, LPDDR3
Pantalha
5 polegadas 16:9, 1920x1080 pixel 441 PPI, IPS, Gorilla Glass 3, espessura: 0,7 mm, Brilhante: sim
Disco rígido
32 GB eMMC Flash, 32 GB 
, 24.7 GB livre
Conexões
1 USB 2.0, Conexões Audio: Conector combinado de 3,5 mm, Card Reader: Cartão micro-SD (SDHC, SDXC, UHS), Brightness Sensor, Sensores: acelerômetro, sensor de proximidade, giroscópio, USB OTG, Miracast, App2SD
Funcionamento em rede
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.0 LE, GSM quad-band (850, 900, 1800, 1.900 MHz), UMTS tri-banda (900, 1900, 2100 MHz), LTE Cat. 4 (banda 3/1800 MHz, band 7/2600 MHz, band 20/800 MHz), downloads/uploads at max. 150/50 Mb/s, dual-SIM, micro-SIM, SAR 0.426 W/kg (body) / 0.288 W/kg (head), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 11 x 143 x 73
Bateria
9.2 Wh, 2420 mAh Lítio-Ion, removeable
Sistema Operativo
Android 5.1 Lollipop
Camera
Primary Camera: 8 MPix f/2.2, Omnivision OV8665, LED flash
Secondary Camera: 2 MPix f/2.8, Omnivision OV2685
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: Alto falante mono na traseira, Teclado: virtual, Iluminação do Teclado: sim, Capa traseira, guia de início rápido, Google apps, Amaze File Manager, Fairphone updater, 24 Meses Garantia, fanless
peso
172 g
Preço
520 Euro

 

Size Comparison

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy S7
Mali-T880 MP12, 8890 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
281 MBit/s ∼100% +71%
Huawei P9
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash
279 MBit/s ∼99% +70%
Fairphone 2
Adreno 330, 801 MSM8974AA, 32 GB eMMC Flash
164 MBit/s ∼58%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy S7
Mali-T880 MP12, 8890 Octa, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
335 MBit/s ∼100% +32%
Fairphone 2
Adreno 330, 801 MSM8974AA, 32 GB eMMC Flash
254 MBit/s ∼76%
Huawei P9
Mali-T880 MP4, Kirin 955, 32 GB eMMC Flash
185 MBit/s ∼55% -27%
Fairphone 2: Total route
Fairphone 2: Total route
Fairphone 2: Turning point
Fairphone 2: Turning point
Fairphone 2: Bridge
Fairphone 2: Bridge
Garmin Edge 500: Total route
Garmin Edge 500: Total route
Garmin Edge 500: Turning point
Garmin Edge 500: Turning point
Garmin Edge 500: Bridge
Garmin Edge 500: Bridge

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 1Scene 2Scene 3
click to load images
472
cd/m²
474
cd/m²
472
cd/m²
472
cd/m²
476
cd/m²
447
cd/m²
488
cd/m²
461
cd/m²
450
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 488 cd/m² Médio: 468 cd/m² Minimum: 7.71 cd/m²
iluminação: 92 %
iluminação com acumulador: 476 cd/m²
Contraste: 1253:1 (Preto: 0.38 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.5 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 4.2 | - Ø
Gamma: 2.54
Fairphone 2
IPS, 1920x1080, 5
Sony Xperia XA
IPS, 1280x720, 5
Huawei P9
IPS-NEO, JDI, 1920x1080, 5.2
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Super AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.2
Samsung Galaxy S7
SAMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.1
Screen
-37%
5%
23%
25%
Brightness
468
475
1%
563
20%
380
-19%
351
-25%
Brightness Distribution
92
81
-12%
91
-1%
91
-1%
98
7%
Black Level *
0.38
0.61
-61%
0.38
-0%
Contrast
1253
849
-32%
1532
22%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.5
6.8
-51%
4.4
2%
1.95
57%
2.04
55%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
4.2
7
-67%
4.8
-14%
1.86
56%
1.63
61%
Gamma
2.54 94%
2.35 102%
2.2 109%
2.13 113%
2.07 116%
CCT
7296 89%
8151 80%
6175 105%
6376 102%
6391 102%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
77.78
86.86
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
99.44
99.35

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

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 266 Hz100 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 266 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 100 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 266 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: 57 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 6668 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Display Response Times

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
27 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 10 ms rise
↘ 17 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 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 52 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (26.7 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
51 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 26 ms rise
↘ 25 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. » 84 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (42.8 ms).
AnTuTu Benchmark v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
37549 Points ∼16%
Sony Xperia XA
48331 Points ∼21% +29%
Huawei P9
95743 Points ∼42% +155%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
41676 Points ∼18% +11%
Samsung Galaxy S7
127902 Points ∼56% +241%
Geekbench 4.0
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
1307 Points ∼5%
Huawei P9
4904 Points ∼18% +275%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
798 Points ∼14%
Huawei P9
1755 Points ∼31% +120%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia XA
1236 Points ∼41%
Huawei P9
2503 Points ∼83%
Samsung Galaxy S7
2022 Points ∼67%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia XA
306 Points ∼6%
Huawei P9
829 Points ∼15%
Samsung Galaxy S7
2216 Points ∼41%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
Points ∼0%
Sony Xperia XA
422 Points ∼11%
Huawei P9
974 Points ∼25%
Samsung Galaxy S7
2170 Points ∼56%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia XA
1259 Points ∼42%
Huawei P9
2510 Points ∼83%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
1479 Points ∼49%
Samsung Galaxy S7
2010 Points ∼67%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Sony Xperia XA
525 Points ∼7%
Huawei P9
1080 Points ∼14%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
275 Points ∼4%
Samsung Galaxy S7
3018 Points ∼39%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
Points ∼0%
Sony Xperia XA
603 Points ∼12%
Huawei P9
1237 Points ∼25%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
336 Points ∼7%
Samsung Galaxy S7
2715 Points ∼55%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
4301 Points ∼6%
Sony Xperia XA
12138 Points ∼17% +182%
Huawei P9
15517 Points ∼22% +261%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
9495 Points ∼13% +121%
Samsung Galaxy S7
19944 Points ∼28% +364%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
10153 Points ∼2%
Sony Xperia XA
10916 Points ∼2% +8%
Huawei P9
21577 Points ∼5% +113%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
7542 Points ∼2% -26%
Samsung Galaxy S7
33348 Points ∼7% +228%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
7796 Points ∼4%
Sony Xperia XA
11156 Points ∼6% +43%
Huawei P9
19854 Points ∼10% +155%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
7903 Points ∼4% +1%
Samsung Galaxy S7
29015 Points ∼15% +272%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
23 fps ∼2%
Sony Xperia XA
18 fps ∼1% -22%
Huawei P9
40 fps ∼3% +74%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
14 fps ∼1% -39%
Samsung Galaxy S7
84 fps ∼6% +265%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
21 fps ∼5%
Sony Xperia XA
28 fps ∼6% +33%
Huawei P9
43 fps ∼9% +105%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
14 fps ∼3% -33%
Samsung Galaxy S7
53 fps ∼12% +152%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
8.8 fps ∼2%
Sony Xperia XA
7.2 fps ∼1% -18%
Huawei P9
18 fps ∼3% +105%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
3.8 fps ∼1% -57%
Samsung Galaxy S7
40 fps ∼7% +355%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
10 fps ∼3%
Sony Xperia XA
15 fps ∼4% +50%
Huawei P9
19 fps ∼5% +90%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
3.8 fps ∼1% -62%
Samsung Galaxy S7
27 fps ∼7% +170%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Sony Xperia XA
4.8 fps ∼1%
Huawei P9
10 fps ∼2%
Samsung Galaxy S7
28 fps ∼7%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Sony Xperia XA
11 fps ∼6%
Huawei P9
11 fps ∼6%
Samsung Galaxy S7
15 fps ∼9%
PCMark for Android - Work performance score (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
3036 Points ∼37%
Sony Xperia XA
4685 Points ∼56% +54%
Huawei P9
7058 Points ∼85% +132%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
4008 Points ∼48% +32%
Samsung Galaxy S7
4826 Points ∼58% +59%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
9 Points ∼1%
Sony Xperia XA
717 Points ∼46% +7867%
Huawei P9
1029 Points ∼67% +11333%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
741 Points ∼48% +8133%
Samsung Galaxy S7
957 Points ∼62% +10533%
Graphics (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
1768 Points ∼21%
Sony Xperia XA
669 Points ∼8% -62%
Huawei P9
1583 Points ∼18% -10%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
488 Points ∼6% -72%
Samsung Galaxy S7
1723 Points ∼20% -3%
Memory (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
433 Points ∼10%
Sony Xperia XA
1076 Points ∼24% +148%
Huawei P9
2627 Points ∼59% +507%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
554 Points ∼13% +28%
Samsung Galaxy S7
2244 Points ∼51% +418%
System (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
1401 Points ∼21%
Sony Xperia XA
2289 Points ∼35% +63%
Huawei P9
3930 Points ∼60% +181%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
2153 Points ∼33% +54%
Samsung Galaxy S7
4217 Points ∼64% +201%
Overall (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
317 Points ∼8%
Sony Xperia XA
1043 Points ∼28% +229%
Huawei P9
2025 Points ∼53% +539%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
810 Points ∼21% +156%
Samsung Galaxy S7
1987 Points ∼52% +527%

Legend

 
Fairphone 2 Qualcomm Snapdragon 801 MSM8974AA, Qualcomm Adreno 330, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Sony Xperia XA Mediatek Helio P10 MT6755, ARM Mali-T860 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Huawei P9 HiSilicon Kirin 955, ARM Mali-T880 MP4, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 Samsung Exynos 7580 Octa, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy S7 Samsung Exynos 8890 Octa, ARM Mali-T880 MP12, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
4249 Points ∼9%
Sony Xperia XA
4046 Points ∼8% -5%
Huawei P9
11783 Points ∼24% +177%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
3611 Points ∼7% -15%
Samsung Galaxy S7
13161 Points ∼27% +210%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
7772.9 ms * ∼13%
Sony Xperia XA
9609.8 ms * ∼16% -24%
Huawei P9
2922.6 ms * ∼5% +62%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
11887 ms * ∼20% -53%
Samsung Galaxy S7
2561.5 ms * ∼4% +67%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
65 Points ∼9%
Sony Xperia XA
72 Points ∼10% +11%
Huawei P9
128 Points ∼17% +97%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
64 Points ∼9% -2%
Samsung Galaxy S7
166 Points ∼22% +155%
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score (sort by value)
Fairphone 2
20.656 Points ∼6%
Sony Xperia XA
27.5 Points ∼8% +33%
Huawei P9
68.4 Points ∼20% +231%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
22 Points ∼7% +7%
Samsung Galaxy S7
74 Points ∼22% +258%

* ... smaller is better

Fairphone 2Sony Xperia XAHuawei P9Samsung Galaxy A5 2016Samsung Galaxy S7
AndroBench 3-5
66%
193%
50%
217%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
24.08
50.68
110%
24.83
3%
53.6
123%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
39.33
72.87
85%
55.05
40%
72.33
84%
Random Write 4KB
5.01
10.6
112%
47.45
847%
11.2
124%
16.01
220%
Random Read 4KB
10.77
22.05
105%
39
262%
22.9
113%
85.9
698%
Sequential Write 256KB
104.1
68.64
-34%
72.19
-31%
60.4
-42%
145.72
40%
Sequential Read 256KB
202.36
240.43
19%
281.26
39%
209.4
3%
483.82
139%
Carga Máxima
 39.9 °C39.2 °C39.4 °C 
 40.3 °C39.2 °C39.6 °C 
 39.2 °C39 °C37.5 °C 
Máximo: 40.3 °C
Médio: 39.3 °C
34.9 °C38.4 °C43.1 °C
34.4 °C35.6 °C45.9 °C
33.7 °C36 °C43.8 °C
Máximo: 45.9 °C
Médio: 38.4 °C
Temperatura do quarto 21.2 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2031.639.82525.430.33125.331.84032.933.45033.640.86331.634.18028.430.41002727.412520.831.51602237.420021.340.625020.846.831521.251.540019.455.850019.562.963017.768.180017.973100017.874.8125017.374.7160017.474.5200016.774.8250017.273315018.277.2400017.977.2500017.675.9630017.779.2800017.882.41000017.981.91250018.176.41600018.266.9SPL3088.7N1.374.6median 17.9Fairphone 2median 73Delta1.311.42832.42833.331.333.332.531.732.534.92634.947.639.447.633.736.233.730.728.630.727.925.427.930.421.330.433.223.333.235.122.535.141.822.441.845.421.345.45018.45055.817.555.860.517.560.56717.26767.416.867.468.117.368.164.817.464.858.716.658.76417.36471.517.671.57417.67474.517.774.573.917.473.97117.77169.417.969.458.318.158.348.918.148.98229.88248.51.348.5median 60.5Sony Xperia XAmedian 17.7median 60.511.61.611.636.634.435.736.63032.332.43031.235.627.531.230.530.927.530.537.739.235.437.733.240.129.733.228.53029.228.526.32725.326.324.42724.124.430.926.42330.939.222.923.139.247.927.618.547.955.633.520.555.655.837.918.755.862.444.618.162.469.250.618.269.271.255.719.171.272.356.31772.371.156.617.371.172.753.317.472.775.95217.575.979.155.617.379.174.452.417.274.4714817.27171.348.217.271.382.458.717.682.478.555.317.778.573.849.817.873.866.543.11866.572.248.817.972.287.76629.987.768.919.11.368.9median 71.1Samsung Galaxy A5 2016median 48.8median 17.9median 71.19.710.31.59.7hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Fairphone 2 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 33.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.1% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 25% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 64% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 55% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 38% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

Sony Xperia XA audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.02 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.3% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 10.7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (28.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 66% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 25% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 81% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 14% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.68 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 33.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.7% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 24% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 65% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 54% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 39% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 0.02 / 0.1 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 0.64 / 1.61 / 1.77 Watt
Carga midlight 5.02 / 6.98 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Fairphone 2
2420 mAh
Sony Xperia XA
2300 mAh
Huawei P9
3000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
2900 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S7
3000 mAh
Power Consumption
10%
-8%
4%
14%
Idle Minimum *
0.64
0.72
-13%
0.77
-20%
0.96
-50%
0.68
-6%
Idle Average *
1.61
1.5
7%
2.36
-47%
1.64
-2%
1.02
37%
Idle Maximum *
1.77
1.57
11%
2.37
-34%
1.71
3%
1.14
36%
Load Average *
5.02
3.48
31%
3.09
38%
2.98
41%
4.73
6%
Load Maximum *
6.98
6.04
13%
5.35
23%
5.08
27%
7.16
-3%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria
Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)
9h 55min
Navegar com WLAN v1.3
5h 21min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
5h 42min
Carga (máximo brilho)
2h 43min
Fairphone 2
2420 mAh
Sony Xperia XA
2300 mAh
Huawei P9
3000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
2900 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S7
3000 mAh
Battery Runtime
20%
81%
169%
114%
Reader / Idle
595
775
30%
1514
154%
2323
290%
1810
204%
H.264
342
460
35%
568
66%
672
96%
892
161%
WiFi v1.3
321
353
10%
569
77%
626
95%
456
42%
Load
163
170
4%
206
26%
483
196%
242
48%

Pro

+ Condições justas de produção
+ Design modular
+ dual-SIM + micro-SD
+ Tela Full HD brilhante
+ Alta velocidades do sistema
+ LTE

Contra

- Preço alto
- Apenas Android 5.1
- Carcaça robusta
- Sem NFC
- Flickering da tela
- Carregador não incluído
- Afogamentos sob uso intenso
- Bateria fraca
In review: Fairphone 2. Review sample courtesy of Fairphone Germany.
In review: Fairphone 2. Review sample courtesy of Fairphone Germany.

Foram estabelecidos padrões elevados: Matérias-primas de fontes conscientes da sua responsabilidade, em vez de serem financiadas por senhores da guerra, salários justos e representantes dos trabalhadores em vez de exploração, condições de trabalho justas em vez de uma fábrica que explora seus empregados e reciclagem em vez de descarte no pátio de sucata. Deve estar claro que um smartphone produzido em condições tão justas não seria uma barganha. Com um preço de 520 Euros (~$554), o Fairphone 2 é quase o dobro de caro que muito modelos cm uma configuração similar. E ao contrário do que o preço talvez sugere, os compradores não recebem um smartphone de gama alta, mas, visto sobriamente, um aparelho de gama média baseado no Android 5.1, desempenho sólido e uma câmera decente - e não muito mais.

O Fairphone 2 está fora de todas as convenções de produção e possui um único ponto forte para suas vendas com o seu design modular. No entanto, o smartphone terá dificuldades no mercado, devido a seu preço alto.

Porém, reduzir o preço do Fairphone 2 para o desempenho disponível seria ... bom - injusto. Ao contrário dos dispositivos móveis fabricados "convencionalmente", na verdade não tem rivais e, visto estritamente, é incomparável. Finalmente os fabricantes não estão interessados em oferecer o dispositivo móvel mais barato possível. O preço assume um lugar secundário atrás da produção social e ambiental mais favorável possível. O seu preço é simplesmente uma consequência disto. E isso, mais uma vez é uma das maiores fortalezas do Fairphone 2: Ele incentiva os compradores a pensar sobre quanto dinheiro eles realmente devem gastar em um smartphone se os seres humanos e não os lucros estão no foco da cadeia de suprimentos. A resposta está diretamente incluída.

O modelo de teste vem com um recurso realmente assassino, e, assim, aumentamos a pontuação total em um ponto. O design modular mostra que os usuários podem consertar um smartphone por si mesmos, com pouco esforço e que inclusive é possível substituir o hardware ou instalar recursos melhores. Deve ser bastante óbvio que a indústria está em contra disto e deseja que os usuários comprem um smartphone completamente novo e caro, em vez de upgrades de hardware econômicos. A ideia consistente do Fairphone 2 nos convenceu, embora a decisão de compra poderia ter sido feita mais fácil. Depois de tudo, devem ser feitos compromissos em termos de configuração, que são are menores, no final.

Fairphone 2 - 11/24/2016 v5.1
Manuel Masiero

Acabamento
66%
Teclado
72 / 75 → 96%
Mouse
89%
Conectividade
41 / 60 → 69%
Peso
90%
Bateria
84%
Pantalha
85%
Desempenho do jogos
23 / 63 → 36%
Desempenho da aplicação
29 / 70 → 41%
Temperatura
84%
Ruído
100%
Audio
64 / 91 → 70%
Camera
62%
Impressão
+1%
Médio
64%
80%
Smartphone - Médio equilibrado

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Smartphone Fairphone 2
Manuel Masiero, 2016-12-16 (Update: 2017-01- 3)