Notebookcheck

Breve Análise do Smartphone Samsung Galaxy A5 (2017)

Daniel Schmidt (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), 02/19/2017

Resistente à água. A série Galaxy A5 agora entra no terceiro round e deve manter seu terreno ao lutar com a potente gama média. Mais poder, armazenamento maior, e proteção contra água e poeira são a ajuda aqui. O teste mostrará se isto será suficiente.

Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 (Galaxy Serie)
Processador
Samsung Exynos 7880
Placa gráfica
ARM Mali-T830 MP3
Memória
3072 MB 
, LPDDR3
Pantalha
5.2 polegadas 16:9, 1920x1080 pixel 424 PPI, capacitiva, Super AMOLED, Corning Gorilla Glass 5, Brilhante: sim
Disco rígido
32 GB eMMC Flash, 32 GB 
, 20.5 GB livre
Conexões
1 USB 2.0, Conexões Audio: Conector de áudio combinado de 3,5 mm, Card Reader: micro-SD máx. 256 GB (SDHC, SDXC), 1 Leitor de Impressões Digitais, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensores: acelerômetro, sensor de proximidade, posição e sensor g, bússola digital, barômetro, Wi-Fi Direct, Ant+
Funcionamento em rede
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.2, GSM/GPRS/Edge (850, 900, 1800 e 1900 MHz), UMTS/HSPA+ (850, 900, 1900, 2100 MHz e AWS), LTE Cat. 7 (FDD: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 17, 20, 28; TDD: 38, 40, 41), LTE, GPS
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 7.9 x 146.1 x 71.4
Bateria
3000 mAh Lítio-Ion, Tempo de conversação 3G (de acordo com o fabricante): 16 h
Sistema Operativo
Android 6.0 Marshmallow
Camera
Primary Camera: 16 MPix (f/1.9, 27mm, autofocus, flash LED, vídeos Full HD)
Secondary Camera: 16 MPix (f/1.9, 1080p videos)
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: Alto falante mono, Teclado: virtual, Adaptador de força, cabo de dados, headset, guia de início rápido, Samsung apps, Microsoft apps, Facebook, 24 Meses Garantia, USB Type-C, nano-SIM, IP 68 (resistente à água e poeira), carga rápida, SAR rate: 0.522W/​kg (head), 1.390W/​kg (body), fanless
peso
159 g, Suprimento de energia: 62 g
Preço
429 Euro

 

Size Comparison

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
OnePlus 3T
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
257 MBit/s ∼100% +20%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
Mali-T830 MP3, 7880, 32 GB eMMC Flash
214 MBit/s ∼83%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
Adreno 506, 625, 32 GB eMMC Flash
121 MBit/s ∼47% -43%
Huawei Nova Plus
Adreno 506, 625, 32 GB eMMC Flash
53.4 MBit/s ∼21% -75%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
OnePlus 3T
Adreno 530, 821 MSM8996 Pro, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
313 MBit/s ∼100% +87%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
Mali-T830 MP3, 7880, 32 GB eMMC Flash
167 MBit/s ∼53%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
Adreno 506, 625, 32 GB eMMC Flash
112 MBit/s ∼36% -33%
Huawei Nova Plus
Adreno 506, 625, 32 GB eMMC Flash
51.5 MBit/s ∼16% -69%
Samsung Galaxy A5 (2017)
Samsung Galaxy A5 (2017)
Samsung Galaxy A5 (2017)
Samsung Galaxy A5 (2017)
Samsung Galaxy A5 (2017)
Samsung Galaxy A5 (2017)
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500
Garmin Edge 500

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
567
cd/m²
542
cd/m²
530
cd/m²
549
cd/m²
539
cd/m²
525
cd/m²
548
cd/m²
552
cd/m²
527
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 567 cd/m² Médio: 542.1 cd/m² Minimum: 1.77 cd/m²
iluminação: 93 %
iluminação com acumulador: 660 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Preto: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.6 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 1.5 | - Ø
Gamma: 2.28
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
Super AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.2
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Super AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.2
Huawei Nova Plus
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5
ZTE Axon 7
AMOLED, 2560x1440, 5.5
OnePlus 3T
Optic-AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.5
Lenovo Moto Z Play
AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.5
Honor 8
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.2
Screen
-20%
-99%
-80%
-182%
-19%
-151%
Brightness
542
380
-30%
481
-11%
334
-38%
430
-21%
511
-6%
443
-18%
Brightness Distribution
93
91
-2%
90
-3%
88
-5%
84
-10%
93
0%
93
0%
Black Level *
0.5
0.4
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
1.6
1.95
-22%
4.2
-163%
4.6
-188%
7.1
-344%
2.2
-38%
5.4
-238%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.5
1.86
-24%
4.8
-220%
2.8
-87%
6.8
-353%
2
-33%
6.7
-347%
Gamma
2.28 105%
2.13 113%
2.36 102%
2.29 105%
2.23 108%
2.25 107%
2.33 103%
CCT
6422 101%
6376 102%
7568 86%
6612 98%
7866 83%
6768 96%
8262 79%
Contrast
970
1128

* ... 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 250 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 250 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 250 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 57 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 6562 (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
3.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2 ms rise
↘ 1.6 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 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 1 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (26.7 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
3.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2 ms rise
↘ 1.6 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 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 0 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (42.8 ms).
AnTuTu Benchmark v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
60603 Points ∼27%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
41676 Points ∼18% -31%
Huawei Nova Plus
64601 Points ∼28% +7%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
61345 Points ∼27% +1%
Honor 8
94671 Points ∼42% +56%
ZTE Axon 7
122524 Points ∼54% +102%
OnePlus 3T
159866 Points ∼70% +164%
Geekbench 4.0
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
4098 Points ∼15%
Huawei Nova Plus
3156 Points ∼11% -23%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
2525 Points ∼9% -38%
Honor 8
5481 Points ∼20% +34%
ZTE Axon 7
3867 Points ∼14% -6%
OnePlus 3T
4236 Points ∼15% +3%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
775 Points ∼14%
Huawei Nova Plus
845 Points ∼15% +9%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
795 Points ∼14% +3%
Honor 8
1726 Points ∼31% +123%
ZTE Axon 7
1280 Points ∼23% +65%
OnePlus 3T
1881 Points ∼33% +143%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
1713 Points ∼57%
Huawei Nova Plus
1773 Points ∼59% +4%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
1636 Points ∼54% -4%
Honor 8
2482 Points ∼82% +45%
ZTE Axon 7
1783 Points ∼59% +4%
OnePlus 3T
1728 Points ∼57% +1%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
710 Points ∼13%
Huawei Nova Plus
384 Points ∼7% -46%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
382 Points ∼7% -46%
Honor 8
818 Points ∼15% +15%
ZTE Axon 7
2528 Points ∼47% +256%
OnePlus 3T
2418 Points ∼45% +241%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
816 Points ∼21%
Huawei Nova Plus
465 Points ∼12% -43%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
461 Points ∼12% -44%
Honor 8
961 Points ∼25% +18%
ZTE Axon 7
2500 Points ∼64% +206%
OnePlus 3T
2221 Points ∼57% +172%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
1752 Points ∼58%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
1479 Points ∼49% -16%
Huawei Nova Plus
1795 Points ∼60% +2%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
1631 Points ∼54% -7%
Honor 8
2587 Points ∼86% +48%
ZTE Axon 7
1099 Points ∼36% -37%
OnePlus 3T
1452 Points ∼48% -17%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
1053 Points ∼14%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
275 Points ∼4% -74%
Huawei Nova Plus
733 Points ∼9% -30%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
725 Points ∼9% -31%
Honor 8
1112 Points ∼14% +6%
ZTE Axon 7
4619 Points ∼60% +339%
OnePlus 3T
3310 Points ∼43% +214%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
1155 Points ∼23%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
336 Points ∼7% -71%
Huawei Nova Plus
844 Points ∼17% -27%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
827 Points ∼17% -28%
Honor 8
1273 Points ∼26% +10%
ZTE Axon 7
2698 Points ∼54% +134%
OnePlus 3T
2577 Points ∼52% +123%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
13057 Points ∼18%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
9495 Points ∼13% -27%
Huawei Nova Plus
15823 Points ∼22% +21%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
15923 Points ∼22% +22%
Honor 8
15531 Points ∼22% +19%
ZTE Axon 7
20408 Points ∼28% +56%
OnePlus 3T
22426 Points ∼31% +72%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
13314 Points ∼3%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
7542 Points ∼2% -43%
Huawei Nova Plus
13412 Points ∼3% +1%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
13437 Points ∼3% +1%
Honor 8
22157 Points ∼5% +66%
ZTE Axon 7
24310 Points ∼5% +83%
OnePlus 3T
34494 Points ∼8% +159%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
13256 Points ∼7%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
7903 Points ∼4% -40%
Huawei Nova Plus
13882 Points ∼7% +5%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
13920 Points ∼7% +5%
Honor 8
20235 Points ∼10% +53%
ZTE Axon 7
23319 Points ∼12% +76%
OnePlus 3T
30810 Points ∼16% +132%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
34 fps ∼3%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
14 fps ∼1% -59%
Huawei Nova Plus
23 fps ∼2% -32%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
23 fps ∼2% -32%
Honor 8
41 fps ∼3% +21%
ZTE Axon 7
88 fps ∼7% +159%
OnePlus 3T
91 fps ∼7% +168%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
33 fps ∼7%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
14 fps ∼3% -58%
Huawei Nova Plus
23 fps ∼5% -30%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
23 fps ∼5% -30%
Honor 8
43 fps ∼9% +30%
ZTE Axon 7
53 fps ∼12% +61%
OnePlus 3T
59 fps ∼13% +79%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
15 fps ∼3%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
3.8 fps ∼1% -75%
Huawei Nova Plus
9.9 fps ∼2% -34%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
10 fps ∼2% -33%
Honor 8
19 fps ∼3% +27%
ZTE Axon 7
39 fps ∼7% +160%
OnePlus 3T
46 fps ∼8% +207%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
15 fps ∼4%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
3.8 fps ∼1% -75%
Huawei Nova Plus
10 fps ∼3% -33%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
10 fps ∼3% -33%
Honor 8
19 fps ∼5% +27%
ZTE Axon 7
28 fps ∼8% +87%
OnePlus 3T
45 fps ∼12% +200%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
9.1 fps ∼2%
Huawei Nova Plus
6.2 fps ∼1% -32%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
6.2 fps ∼1% -32%
Honor 8
10 fps ∼2% +10%
ZTE Axon 7
31 fps ∼7% +241%
OnePlus 3T
32 fps ∼8% +252%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
9 fps ∼5%
Huawei Nova Plus
6.6 fps ∼4% -27%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
6.7 fps ∼4% -26%
Honor 8
11 fps ∼6% +22%
ZTE Axon 7
16 fps ∼9% +78%
OnePlus 3T
32 fps ∼18% +256%
PCMark for Android - Work performance score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
5035 Points ∼61%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
4008 Points ∼48% -20%
Huawei Nova Plus
5724 Points ∼69% +14%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
6767 Points ∼82% +34%
Honor 8
6735 Points ∼81% +34%
ZTE Axon 7
4970 Points ∼60% -1%
OnePlus 3T
5664 Points ∼68% +12%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
659 Points ∼43%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
741 Points ∼48% +12%
Huawei Nova Plus
754 Points ∼49% +14%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
649 Points ∼42% -2%
Honor 8
994 Points ∼64% +51%
ZTE Axon 7
963 Points ∼62% +46%
OnePlus 3T
891 Points ∼58% +35%
Graphics (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
1528 Points ∼18%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
488 Points ∼6% -68%
Huawei Nova Plus
1015 Points ∼12% -34%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
1013 Points ∼12% -34%
Honor 8
1703 Points ∼20% +11%
ZTE Axon 7
4631 Points ∼54% +203%
OnePlus 3T
4444 Points ∼52% +191%
Memory (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
1508 Points ∼34%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
554 Points ∼13% -63%
Huawei Nova Plus
1553 Points ∼35% +3%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
795 Points ∼18% -47%
Honor 8
2556 Points ∼58% +69%
ZTE Axon 7
1489 Points ∼34% -1%
OnePlus 3T
1954 Points ∼44% +30%
System (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
2593 Points ∼39%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
2153 Points ∼33% -17%
Huawei Nova Plus
2132 Points ∼32% -18%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
2069 Points ∼31% -20%
Honor 8
3952 Points ∼60% +52%
ZTE Axon 7
3307 Points ∼50% +28%
OnePlus 3T
3130 Points ∼48% +21%
Overall (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
1408 Points ∼37%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
810 Points ∼21% -42%
Huawei Nova Plus
1262 Points ∼33% -10%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
1019 Points ∼27% -28%
Honor 8
2034 Points ∼54% +44%
ZTE Axon 7
2165 Points ∼57% +54%
OnePlus 3T
2218 Points ∼59% +58%

Legend

 
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 Samsung Exynos 7880, ARM Mali-T830 MP3, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 Samsung Exynos 7580 Octa, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
Huawei Nova Plus Qualcomm Snapdragon 625, Qualcomm Adreno 506, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Lenovo Moto Z Play Qualcomm Snapdragon 625, Qualcomm Adreno 506, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Honor 8 HiSilicon Kirin 950, ARM Mali-T880 MP4, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
ZTE Axon 7 Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
OnePlus 3T Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
89 Points ∼12%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
64 Points ∼9% -28%
Huawei Nova Plus
83 Points ∼11% -7%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
83 Points ∼11% -7%
Honor 8
138 Points ∼18% +55%
ZTE Axon 7
111 Points ∼15% +25%
OnePlus 3T
135 Points ∼18% +52%
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
32.222 Points ∼10%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
22 Points ∼7% -32%
Huawei Nova Plus
31.3 Points ∼9% -3%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
31.8 Points ∼10% -1%
Honor 8
64.046 Points ∼19% +99%
ZTE Axon 7
44.754 Points ∼13% +39%
OnePlus 3T
54.526 Points ∼16% +69%
Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
5256 Points ∼11%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
3611 Points ∼7% -31%
Huawei Nova Plus
4730 Points ∼10% -10%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
4979 Points ∼10% -5%
Honor 8
10692 Points ∼22% +103%
ZTE Axon 7
8062 Points ∼16% +53%
OnePlus 3T
9798 Points ∼20% +86%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value)
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
6442.4 ms * ∼11%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
11887 ms * ∼20% -85%
Huawei Nova Plus
8027.7 ms * ∼13% -25%
Lenovo Moto Z Play
8168.9 ms * ∼14% -27%
Honor 8
2979 ms * ∼5% +54%
ZTE Axon 7
3096.5 ms * ∼5% +52%
OnePlus 3T
2719.3 ms * ∼5% +58%

* ... smaller is better

Samsung Galaxy A5 2017Samsung Galaxy A5 2016Huawei Nova PlusLenovo Moto Z PlayHonor 8ZTE Axon 7OnePlus 3T
AndroBench 3-5
-3%
27%
63%
36%
115%
305%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
55.98
33.32
-40%
50.57
-10%
23.59
-58%
51.34
-8%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
73.71
41.64
-44%
74.58
1%
53.68
-27%
78.39
6%
Random Write 4KB
12.13
11.2
-8%
30.12
148%
45.58
276%
31.5
160%
16.22
34%
74.39
513%
Random Read 4KB
22.41
22.9
2%
35.64
59%
38.78
73%
34.16
52%
121.07
440%
123.57
451%
Sequential Write 256KB
77.1
60.4
-22%
82.13
7%
73.14
-5%
119.25
55%
150.92
96%
165.3
114%
Sequential Read 256KB
182.03
209.4
15%
241.57
33%
254.78
40%
247.46
36%
406.49
123%
436.43
140%
Asphalt 8: Airborne
 ConfiguraçõesValor
 high29 fps
 very low30 fps
Dead Trigger 2
 ConfiguraçõesValor
 high30 fps
Carga Máxima
 32.5 °C32.2 °C31.2 °C 
 33.3 °C33 °C32.9 °C 
 33.4 °C33.3 °C32.7 °C 
Máximo: 33.4 °C
Médio: 32.7 °C
30.3 °C31.2 °C31.5 °C
30.7 °C33 °C32.5 °C
29.3 °C33.5 °C34 °C
Máximo: 34 °C
Médio: 31.8 °C
alimentação elétrica  30 °C | Temperatura do quarto 21.5 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2031.641.12525.4403125.336.74032.9365033.635.66331.630.68028.432.91002733.812520.841.71602244.420021.348.425020.850.531521.256.640019.462.550019.566.263017.766.180017.974.2100017.877.3125017.374.3160017.473.8200016.771.8250017.269.3315018.269.5400017.966.5500017.661.4630017.755.8800017.854.51000017.959.91250018.152.21600018.249.5SPL3083N1.350.1median 17.9Samsung Galaxy A5 2017median 61.4Delta1.39.531.64225.437.625.331.432.936.333.651.731.634.328.431.72736.920.8262229.921.341.820.853.921.259.419.463.619.567.417.766.117.970.117.869.817.373.417.474.616.776.717.277.218.278.917.979.617.67617.772.917.873.217.971.118.164.518.257.23087.41.368.4median 17.9Huawei Nova Plusmedian 69.81.310.231.635.725.434.625.329.332.928.433.637.131.634.728.429.52729.720.8332243.221.349.620.85621.257.419.459.319.566.517.768.517.974.417.875.117.377.317.478.316.778.417.278.218.278.217.976.117.67517.773.517.873.717.97418.175.218.2693088.11.372.7median 17.9Lenovo Moto Z Playmedian 73.71.39.2hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.96 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 9.4% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 22% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 66% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 53% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 39% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Huawei Nova Plus audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.39 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28.5% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (15.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 15% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 74% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 48% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 45% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Lenovo Moto Z Play audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.13 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.2% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (1.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 3% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 93% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 32% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 62% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 0 / 0.14 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 0.64 / 1.36 / 1.4 Watt
Carga midlight 2.53 / 3.63 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
3000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
2900 mAh
Huawei Nova Plus
3340 mAh
Lenovo Moto Z Play
3510 mAh
Honor 8
3000 mAh
ZTE Axon 7
3250 mAh
OnePlus 3T
3400 mAh
Power Consumption
-30%
-16%
23%
-53%
-50%
-84%
Idle Minimum *
0.64
0.96
-50%
0.49
23%
0.51
20%
0.78
-22%
0.64
-0%
0.61
5%
Idle Average *
1.36
1.64
-21%
1.63
-20%
0.87
36%
1.89
-39%
0.84
38%
1.77
-30%
Idle Maximum *
1.4
1.71
-22%
1.76
-26%
0.9
36%
2.02
-44%
0.87
38%
1.81
-29%
Load Average *
2.53
2.98
-18%
2.98
-18%
1.69
33%
5.28
-109%
6.02
-138%
6.67
-164%
Load Maximum *
3.63
5.08
-40%
4.99
-37%
4
-10%
5.44
-50%
10.45
-188%
10.98
-202%

* ... smaller is better

PCMark for Android - Work 2.0 battery life
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
681 min ∼100%
Huawei Mate 9
677 min ∼99% -1%
Samsung Galaxy J5 2016
473 min ∼69% -31%
Samsung Galaxy S7
371 min ∼54% -46%
Tempo de Execução da Bateria
Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)
40h 18min
Navegar com WLAN v1.3
14h 03min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
16h 24min
Carga (máximo brilho)
7h 47min
Samsung Galaxy A5 2017
3000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
2900 mAh
Huawei Nova Plus
3340 mAh
Lenovo Moto Z Play
3510 mAh
Honor 8
3000 mAh
ZTE Axon 7
3250 mAh
OnePlus 3T
3400 mAh
Battery Runtime
-15%
-17%
16%
-43%
-39%
-35%
Reader / Idle
2418
2323
-4%
2048
-15%
2540
5%
1487
-39%
1735
-28%
1423
-41%
H.264
984
672
-32%
732
-26%
1190
21%
526
-47%
704
-28%
810
-18%
WiFi v1.3
843
626
-26%
820
-3%
824
-2%
499
-41%
411
-51%
494
-41%
Load
467
483
3%
366
-22%
652
40%
255
-45%
245
-48%
282
-40%

Pro

+ Ótima tela
+ Design excelente
+ Excelente duração da bateria
+ Resistente à agua e poeira (IP68)
+ Armazenamento expansível
+ Ampla cobertura de frequências de redes móveis
+ USB Tipo C
+ SoC veloz

Contra

- Sem OTG
- Somente USB 2.0
- O body SAR poderia ser menor
- Sem dual-SIM
- PWM
- Desempenho fraco do sistema
- Lento armazenamento eMMC
In review: Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 (SM-A520F).  Test model courtesy of Notebooksbilliger.de
In review: Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 (SM-A520F). Test model courtesy of Notebooksbilliger.de

A nova versão 2017 do Samsung Galaxy A5 (SM-A520F) é de forma alguma inferior a seus concorrentes - o fabricante coreano entre um smartphone realmente muito bom. Seu design bem-sucedido e, sobre tudo, sua excelente duração da bateria são convincentes. Embora o desempenho não estabeleça padrões, é muito adequado para a faixa de preços. Somente a IU Grace não roda com muita fluidez, mas é uma melhoria sobre os seu predecessor TouchWiz. As câmeras tiram boas fotos, embora nós teríamos desejado uma melhor configuração para a função de vídeo. A resistência á água e poeira, que também encontramos nos modelos premium da Samsung, é única nesta faixa de preços. A tela simplesmente é excelente. No entanto, os usuários que reagem de forma sensíveis ao flickering PWM, como é caso aqui, deveriam considerar isto quando estiverem escolhendo um smartphone.

A Samsung melhorou os pontos mais importantes em seu novo Galaxy A5 e convence principalmente com a sua excelente duração de bateria.

O Galaxy A5 (2017) não apresenta grandes desvantagens, mas apenas pequenos detalhes, como o armazenamento lento, a falta de OTG e dual-SIM, certamente poderiam ser fatores decisivos para alguns compradores.

Samsung Galaxy A5 2017 - 02/07/2017 v6
Daniel Schmidt

Acabamento
92%
Teclado
67 / 75 → 89%
Mouse
91%
Conectividade
47 / 60 → 79%
Peso
92%
Bateria
97%
Pantalha
92%
Desempenho do jogos
41 / 63 → 65%
Desempenho da aplicação
50 / 70 → 71%
Temperatura
92%
Ruído
100%
Audio
58 / 91 → 64%
Camera
71%
Médio
76%
87%
Smartphone - Médio equilibrado

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Smartphone Samsung Galaxy A5 (2017)
Daniel Schmidt, 2017-02-19 (Update: 2017-03- 2)