Breve Análise do Smartphone Reforçado Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s: Uma raridade para os fanáticos dos smartphones para exteriores
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
Networking | |
iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
Average of class Smartphone (99.2 - 864, n=8, last 2 years) | |
Ulefone Armor 6 | |
RugGear RG655 | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s | |
Poptel P60 | |
Cyrus CS24 | |
Cubot King Kong 3 | |
CAT S31 | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
iperf3 receive AX12 | |
Average of class Smartphone (101 - 836, n=9, last 2 years) | |
Ulefone Armor 6 | |
RugGear RG655 | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s | |
Cubot King Kong 3 | |
Cyrus CS24 | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
CAT S31 | |
Poptel P60 |
|
iluminação: 90 %
iluminação com acumulador: 525 cd/m²
Contraste: 1010:1 (Preto: 0.52 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5.1
ΔE Greyscale 7.8 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
96.8% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.53
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s IPS (PLS), 1280x720, 5.00 | RugGear RG655 IPS, 1440x720, 5.50 | Cubot King Kong 3 IPS, 1440x720, 5.50 | Ulefone Armor 6 IPS LCD, 2246x1080, 6.20 | Poptel P60 LCD IPS, 2160x1080, 5.70 | CAT S31 IPS, 1280x720, 4.70 | Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 IPS, 1280x720, 5.00 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | -9% | 6% | 32% | 14% | 32% | -12% | |
Brightness middle | 525 | 593 13% | 365 -30% | 418 -20% | 401 -24% | 784 49% | 445 -15% |
Brightness | 513 | 579 13% | 379 -26% | 413 -19% | 387 -25% | 750 46% | 437 -15% |
Brightness Distribution | 90 | 88 -2% | 82 -9% | 91 1% | 92 2% | 92 2% | 88 -2% |
Black Level * | 0.52 | 0.46 12% | 0.14 73% | 0.2 62% | 0.14 73% | 0.45 13% | 0.67 -29% |
Contrast | 1010 | 1289 28% | 2607 158% | 2090 107% | 2864 184% | 1742 72% | 664 -34% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 6 | 8.9 -48% | 8.03 -34% | 4.5 25% | 7.5 -25% | 4.28 29% | 6.5 -8% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 10.9 | 19.5 -79% | 16.34 -50% | 6.8 38% | 16.1 -48% | 8.75 20% | 10.6 3% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 7.8 | 8.5 -9% | 10.3 -32% | 3.3 58% | 9.6 -23% | 6.1 22% | 7.2 8% |
Gamma | 2.53 87% | 2.89 76% | 2.197 100% | 2.24 98% | 1.99 111% | 2.49 88% | 2.53 87% |
CCT | 8605 76% | 7488 87% | 9941 65% | 7205 90% | 8242 79% | 7175 91% | 8274 79% |
* ... smaller is better
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 18694 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured. |
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
33.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 21.2 ms rise | |
↘ 12.4 ms fall | ||
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 88 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21.8 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
42 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 20.8 ms rise | |
↘ 21.2 ms fall | ||
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 62 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (34.3 ms). |
Geekbench 4.4 | |
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s | |
RugGear RG655 | |
Cubot King Kong 3 | |
Ulefone Armor 6 | |
Poptel P60 | |
CAT S31 | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (1168 - 1216, n=3) | |
Average of class Smartphone (800 - 8424, n=85, last 2 years) | |
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s | |
RugGear RG655 | |
Cubot King Kong 3 | |
Ulefone Armor 6 | |
Poptel P60 | |
CAT S31 | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (3590 - 4082, n=3) | |
Average of class Smartphone (2630 - 21505, n=85, last 2 years) | |
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s | |
Cubot King Kong 3 | |
Poptel P60 | |
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (2832 - 3569, n=3) | |
Average of class Smartphone (2053 - 14785, n=65, last 2 years) |
PCMark for Android | |
Work performance score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s | |
RugGear RG655 | |
Cubot King Kong 3 | |
Ulefone Armor 6 | |
Poptel P60 | |
CAT S31 | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (6316 - 6902, n=3) | |
Average of class Smartphone (10884 - 19297, n=2, last 2 years) | |
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s | |
RugGear RG655 | |
Cubot King Kong 3 | |
Ulefone Armor 6 | |
Poptel P60 | |
CAT S31 | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (5136 - 5309, n=3) | |
Average of class Smartphone (9101 - 12871, n=9, last 2 years) |
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 | |
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s | |
RugGear RG655 | |
Cubot King Kong 3 | |
Ulefone Armor 6 | |
Poptel P60 | |
CAT S31 | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (31 - 41, n=3) | |
Average of class Smartphone (22 - 165, n=183, last 2 years) | |
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s | |
RugGear RG655 | |
Cubot King Kong 3 | |
Ulefone Armor 6 | |
Poptel P60 | |
CAT S31 | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (20 - 25, n=3) | |
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 504, n=183, last 2 years) |
GFXBench 3.0 | |
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s | |
RugGear RG655 | |
Cubot King Kong 3 | |
Ulefone Armor 6 | |
Poptel P60 | |
CAT S31 | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (20 - 27, n=3) | |
Average of class Smartphone (6.8 - 161, n=184, last 2 years) | |
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s | |
RugGear RG655 | |
Cubot King Kong 3 | |
Ulefone Armor 6 | |
Poptel P60 | |
CAT S31 | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (10 - 13, n=3) | |
Average of class Smartphone (9.2 - 331, n=184, last 2 years) |
GFXBench 3.1 | |
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s | |
RugGear RG655 | |
Cubot King Kong 3 | |
Ulefone Armor 6 | |
Poptel P60 | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (14 - 19, n=3) | |
Average of class Smartphone (3.7 - 143, n=184, last 2 years) | |
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s | |
RugGear RG655 | |
Cubot King Kong 3 | |
Ulefone Armor 6 | |
Poptel P60 | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | |
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (6.5 - 8.1, n=3) | |
Average of class Smartphone (6.2 - 223, n=184, last 2 years) |
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s | |
RugGear RG655 | |
Cubot King Kong 3 | |
Ulefone Armor 6 | |
Poptel P60 | |
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (89089 - 102121, n=3) |
Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
Average of class Smartphone (21.2 - 351, n=165, last 2 years) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (21.5 - 23.4, n=3) | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s (Chrome 75) | |
Cubot King Kong 3 |
Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
Average of class Smartphone (14.9 - 445, n=153, last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s | |
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (20.7 - 22.2, n=3) |
WebXPRT 3 - --- | |
Average of class Smartphone (37 - 304, n=130, last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s | |
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (45 - 48, n=3) | |
RugGear RG655 (Chrome 75) |
Octane V2 - Total Score | |
Average of class Smartphone (4633 - 89112, n=198, last 2 years) | |
Ulefone Armor 6 (Chrome 71) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (6921 - 7470, n=3) | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s (Chrome 75) | |
Cubot King Kong 3 (Chrome 73) | |
Poptel P60 (Chrome 71) | |
RugGear RG655 | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 (Chrome 58) | |
CAT S31 |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score | |
CAT S31 | |
Poptel P60 (Chrome 71) | |
RugGear RG655 | |
Cubot King Kong 3 (Chrome 73) | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 (Chrome 58) | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s (Chrome 75) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 7884B (5546 - 5917, n=3) | |
Ulefone Armor 6 (Chrome 71) | |
Average of class Smartphone (388 - 9999, n=163, last 2 years) |
* ... smaller is better
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s | RugGear RG655 | Cubot King Kong 3 | Ulefone Armor 6 | Poptel P60 | CAT S31 | Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 | Average 32 GB eMMC Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AndroBench 3-5 | -7% | -1% | 39% | 33% | -23% | -21% | 9% | 938% | |
Sequential Read 256KB | 298.6 | 233.3 -22% | 241 -19% | 290.8 -3% | 288.2 -3% | 71.1 -76% | 181.6 -39% | 242 ? -19% | 1281 ? 329% |
Sequential Write 256KB | 85.4 | 121.3 42% | 134.3 57% | 188.4 121% | 188.8 121% | 62.1 -27% | 73.6 -14% | 100.5 ? 18% | 899 ? 953% |
Random Read 4KB | 59.6 | 15.99 -73% | 17.21 -71% | 81.3 36% | 69.7 17% | 14.28 -76% | 21.8 -63% | 43.1 ? -28% | 225 ? 278% |
Random Write 4KB | 10.38 | 11.68 13% | 11.21 8% | 19.87 91% | 15.18 46% | 14.81 43% | 11.9 15% | 22.1 ? 113% | 238 ? 2193% |
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 79.6 ? | 82.4 ? 4% | 81.2 2% | 75.6 ? -5% | 80 ? 1% | 81.8 3% | 69 ? -13% | 71.8 ? -10% | |
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 64.3 ? | 61.7 ? -4% | 74.3 16% | 60.1 ? -7% | 72.8 ? 13% | 59.5 -7% | 55.7 ? -13% | 52.9 ? -18% |
PUBG Compare
Asphalt 9 Legends
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 33 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 35 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 56 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 30.4 °C / 87 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26 °C / 79 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 29% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.2% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 37% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 56% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 57% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 36% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 26%, worst was 134%
Ulefone Armor 6 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.6% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (16.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.1% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 10.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 46% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 45% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 66% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 27% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 26%, worst was 134%
desligado | ![]() ![]() |
Ocioso | ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Carga |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | |
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s 2800 mAh | RugGear RG655 4200 mAh | Cubot King Kong 3 6000 mAh | Ulefone Armor 6 5000 mAh | Poptel P60 5000 mAh | CAT S31 4000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 2800 mAh | Average Samsung Exynos 7884B | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -7% | -46% | -34% | -16% | -16% | -14% | -8% | -33% | |
Idle Minimum * | 0.65 | 0.81 -25% | 0.9 -38% | 0.9 -38% | 0.81 -25% | 0.73 -12% | 0.56 14% | 0.67 ? -3% | 0.89 ? -37% |
Idle Average * | 1.62 | 1.85 -14% | 1.9 -17% | 2.04 -26% | 2.14 -32% | 2.21 -36% | 1.57 3% | 1.617 ? -0% | 1.464 ? 10% |
Idle Maximum * | 1.66 | 1.87 -13% | 2.4 -45% | 2.09 -26% | 2.16 -30% | 2.25 -36% | 1.68 -1% | 1.777 ? -7% | 1.669 ? -1% |
Load Average * | 3.03 | 2.58 15% | 5.2 -72% | 3.4 -12% | 3.02 -0% | 2.99 1% | 4.6 -52% | 3.73 ? -23% | 4.84 ? -60% |
Load Maximum * | 4.34 | 4.23 3% | 6.8 -57% | 7.31 -68% | 4.01 8% | 4.12 5% | 5.92 -36% | 4.67 ? -8% | 7.71 ? -78% |
* ... smaller is better
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s 2800 mAh | Samsung Galaxy XCover 4 2800 mAh | RugGear RG655 4200 mAh | Cubot King Kong 3 6000 mAh | Ulefone Armor 6 5000 mAh | Poptel P60 5000 mAh | CAT S31 4000 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | 10% | 62% | 105% | 41% | 96% | 74% | |
Reader / Idle | 1199 | 1388 16% | |||||
H.264 | 598 | 681 14% | 1019 70% | ||||
WiFi v1.3 | 619 | 668 8% | 945 53% | 1267 105% | 874 41% | 1214 96% | 1074 74% |
Load | 200 | 205 3% |
Pro
Contra
O novo XCover é um tapa na cara metafórico em todos os entusiastas de smartphones para exteriores. Isso pode soar duro, mas é a descrição mais precisa de nossas impressões. Apesar da promessa de suporte de longa data com atualizações (de segurança), esperaríamos muito mais depois de dois anos de pesquisa e desenvolvimento. É verdade que o XCover 4s oferece alguns recursos importantes para entusiastas de smartphones para exteriores, como bateria substituível pelo usuário, botões de hardware e uma carcaça robusta. No entanto, por outro lado, exige muitos compromissos que, em última análise, custam seu endosso, especialmente considerando o preço de rua recomendado da Samsung.
O design de 2017 do dispositivo permaneceu praticamente inalterado e os marcos são muito grandes para um smartphone moderno, até mesmo para a variedade reforçada para exteriores. Além disso, achamos que os problemas com a entrada de água que encontramos com o Galaxy XCover 4 ainda estejam presentes, dado que a carcaça permanece praticamente inalterada. A duração da bateria está abaixo da média para um smartphone de exteriores e não podemos deixar de nos perguntar por que a Samsung não aumentou a capacidade da bateria nos últimos dois anos. A mesma questão deve ser levantada em relação ao armazenamento interno. 32 GB de armazenamento eMMC lento são ruins para 2019, independentemente do que a concorrência tem a oferecer.
A Samsung é o “King of the Hill” no universo OLED, mas optou por um painel IPS com baixo contraste e pouca iluminação, com ângulos de visão ruins para o XCover 4s. O desempenho do sistema foi bastante fraco, principalmente devido ao comparativamente lento SoC Exynos combinado com a IU One da Samsung. Um SoC mais poderoso, como o Samsung Exynos 7885 1,4 GHz, e mais RAM teriam feito maravilhas neste caso. Também não podemos entender por que a Samsung não incluiu nenhum recurso de identificação biométrica em um smartphone de 2019 para exteriores, e porque o número de bandas LTE suportadas é muito limitado. Depois de tudo o dispositivo é claramente destinado ao mercado empresarial.
Vinho novo em garrafas antigas. O Galaxy XCover 4s não é ruim, mas esperávamos mais depois de dois anos.
Se você está no mercado por um smartphone para uso em exteriores e está procurando uma alternativa para o XCover 4s da Samsung, sugerimos dar uma olhada mais de perto no Ulefone Armor 6.
Samsung Galaxy XCover 4s
-
10/16/2019 v7
Marcus Herbrich