Notebookcheck

Breve Análise do Smartphone Xiaomi Mi 9

Manuel Masiero, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, Felicitas Krohn (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), 03/31/2019

Um carro-chefe acessível A Xiaomi tornou o impossível possível com o Mi 9, pelo menos de acordo com os padrões estabelecidos por outros fabricantes. O Mi 9 custa apenas 450 Euros (~$505), que é o preço médio, mas é um dos melhores smartphones carro chefe que você pode comprar atualmente. Sua câmera tripla de 48 MP, armazenamento flash UFS 2.1, design premium e tela AMOLED são apenas algumas das razões pelas quais o dispositivo se destaca, assim como seu novo SoC Snapdragon 855. Colocamos o Mi 9 à prova em nossa análise e vemos como ele se compara a outros smartphones carros chefe.

Xiaomi Mi 9 (Mi Serie)
Processador
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
Placa gráfica
Qualcomm Adreno 640
Memória
6144 MB 
, LPDDR4x, 2133 MHz dual-channel
Pantalha
6.39 polegadas 19.5:9, 2340 x 1080 pixel 403 PPI, Capacitiva, AMOLED, Corning Gorilla Glass 6, revestimento oleofóbico, anti digitais, NTSC 103.8%, relação tela-corpo de 90,7%, Brilhante: sim
Disco rígido
64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 64 GB 
, 50.51 GB livre
Conexões
1 USB 2.0, Conexões Audio: USB Type-C, 1 Leitor de Impressões Digitais, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensores: Acelerômetro, sensor de foco láser, bússola eletrônica, giroscópio, sensor de proximidade, USB Type-C, aptX, aptX-HD, dual-SIM VoLTE, Wi-Fi Direct, Wi-Fi Display, Wi-Fi 2x2 MIMO, MU-MIMO, Google Pay
Funcionamento em rede
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM: 850, 900, 1,800, 1,900. UMTS: B1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 34, 39. LTE: B1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 20, 28, 38, 39, 40. 4x4 MIMO antenna. SAR values: Body – 1.301 W/kg, Head - 1.389 W/kg., Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 7.61 x 157.5 x 74.67
Bateria
3300 mAh Lítio-Polímero, Quick Charge 4.0, carregamento sem fio de 20 W, Carregamento rápido com fio de 27 W
Sistema Operativo
Android 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix , Sony IMX586, f/1.75, 1/2", 0.8 μm. 16 MPix wide-angle camera: f/2.2, 13 mm, 1/3.0", 1.0 μm. 12 MP telephoto camera: f/2.2, 54 mm, 1/3.6 ", 1.0 μm, 2x optical zoom. Photos up to 4K, videos in up to 8,000 x 6,000.
Secondary Camera: 20 MPix , f/2.0, 0.9 μm, HDR, câmera lenta em até 1080p @ 960 FPS, 4K @ 60 FPS
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: Alto-falante mono, Teclado: Virtual, Fonte de alimentação modular, Cabo USB Type-C para Type-A, capa protetora, ferramenta SIM, guia de início rápido, cartão de garantia, MIUI 10, 12 Meses Garantia, fanless
peso
173 g, Suprimento de energia: 35 g
Preço
449 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Size Comparison

157.5 mm 74.8 mm 8.2 mm 185 g156.9 mm 72.4 mm 8.6 mm 189 g157.6 mm 74.1 mm 7.8 mm 198 g157.5 mm 74.67 mm 7.61 mm 173 g156.9 mm 75.4 mm 8.1 mm 180 g154.9 mm 74.8 mm 7.6 mm 175 g150.9 mm 75.7 mm 8.3 mm 194 g
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Mi 9
Adreno 640, 855, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
678 (min: 549, max: 725) MBit/s ∼100%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Mali-G76 MP12, 9820, 512 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
633 (min: 561, max: 684) MBit/s ∼93% -7%
OnePlus 6T
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
629 (min: 621, max: 638) MBit/s ∼93% -7%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
615 (min: 532, max: 642) MBit/s ∼91% -9%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
491 (min: 100, max: 534) MBit/s ∼72% -28%
Apple iPhone XR
A12 Bionic GPU, A12 Bionic, 128 GB NVMe
517 (min: 477, max: 528) MBit/s ∼76% -24%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
491 (min: 444, max: 499) MBit/s ∼72% -28%
Honor View 20
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
339 (min: 325, max: 351) MBit/s ∼50% -50%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=391)
221 MBit/s ∼33% -67%
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% +30%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
663 (min: 289, max: 805) MBit/s ∼95% +24%
Apple iPhone XR
A12 Bionic GPU, A12 Bionic, 128 GB NVMe
644 (min: 578, max: 672) MBit/s ∼93% +21%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Adreno 640, 855, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
534 (min: 430, max: 578) MBit/s ∼77%
OnePlus 6T
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
474 (min: 241, max: 497) MBit/s ∼68% -11%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Mali-G76 MP12, 9820, 512 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
457 (min: 398, max: 508) MBit/s ∼66% -14%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Adreno 630, 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
429 (min: 256, max: 448) MBit/s ∼62% -20%
Honor View 20
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
298 (min: 278, max: 319) MBit/s ∼43% -44%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=391)
212 MBit/s ∼30% -60%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø678 (549-725)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø534 (430-578)
GPS Test: Xiaomi Mi 9 – Overview
GPS Test: Xiaomi Mi 9 – Overview
GPS Test: Xiaomi Mi 9 - Corners
GPS Test: Xiaomi Mi 9 - Corners
GPS Test: Xiaomi Mi 9 - Roundabout
GPS Test: Xiaomi Mi 9 - Roundabout
GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy S10+ - Overview
GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy S10+ - Overview
GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy S10+ - Overview
GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy S10+ - Overview
GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy S10+ - Roundabout
GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy S10+ - Roundabout

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
568
cd/m²
587
cd/m²
589
cd/m²
589
cd/m²
593
cd/m²
600
cd/m²
591
cd/m²
564
cd/m²
601
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 601 cd/m² Médio: 586.9 cd/m² Minimum: 2.28 cd/m²
iluminação: 94 %
iluminação com acumulador: 593 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Preto: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 0.9 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6.1
ΔE Greyscale 1.5 | 0.64-98 Ø6.3
95.4% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.27
Xiaomi Mi 9
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.39
Apple iPhone XR
IPS, 1792x828, 6.1
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
OLED, 3120x1440, 6.3
Honor View 20
LTPS, 2310x1080, 6.4
OnePlus 6T
Optic AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.41
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
OLED, 3040x1440, 6.4
Xiaomi Mi 8
AMOLED, 2248x1080, 6.21
Screen
-18%
-22%
-79%
-58%
-113%
-157%
Brightness middle
593
672
13%
576
-3%
492
-17%
437
-26%
710
20%
430
-27%
Brightness
587
641
9%
582
-1%
475
-19%
442
-25%
721
23%
434
-26%
Brightness Distribution
94
92
-2%
90
-4%
94
0%
95
1%
97
3%
94
0%
Black Level *
0.35
0.4
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
0.9
1.3
-44%
1.3
-44%
2.4
-167%
2.21
-146%
3.7
-311%
5.09
-466%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
2
2.7
-35%
3.5
-75%
5.2
-160%
4.27
-114%
10.3
-415%
8.05
-303%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.5
2.2
-47%
1.6
-7%
3.2
-113%
2.1
-40%
1.5
-0%
3.3
-120%
Gamma
2.27 97%
2.3 96%
2.18 101%
2.06 107%
2.307 95%
2.1 105%
2.257 97%
CCT
6548 99%
6868 95%
6561 99%
7125 91%
6353 102%
6611 98%
7026 93%
Contrast
1920
1230

* ... 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 245.1 Hz ≤ 99 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 245.1 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 99 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 245.1 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9554 (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
4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2 ms rise
↘ 2 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 (25.3 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
4.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2.4 ms rise
↘ 2 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. » 1 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (40.4 ms).
Geekbench 4.3
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7482 Points ∼36%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
21070 Points ∼100% +182%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
8938 Points ∼42% +19%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
9028 Points ∼43% +21%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
13341 Points ∼63% +78%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
10177 Points ∼48% +36%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
13371 Points ∼63% +79%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (7372 - 7936, n=5)
7548 Points ∼36% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (663 - 21070, n=293)
4529 Points ∼21% -39%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10999 Points ∼98%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
11276 Points ∼100% +3%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
10024 Points ∼89% -9%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
9868 Points ∼88% -10%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
8995 Points ∼80% -18%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
10259 Points ∼91% -7%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
8907 Points ∼79% -19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (10187 - 11388, n=6)
10988 Points ∼97% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1174 - 11598, n=347)
4475 Points ∼40% -59%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3523 Points ∼74%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
4750 Points ∼100% +35%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
3378 Points ∼71% -4%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
3314 Points ∼70% -6%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
2384 Points ∼50% -32%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
4505 Points ∼95% +28%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
2430 Points ∼51% -31%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3460 - 3537, n=6)
3501 Points ∼74% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (437 - 4824, n=348)
1328 Points ∼28% -62%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9035 Points ∼96%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
9225 Points ∼98% +2%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
9243 Points ∼98% +2%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
8487 Points ∼90% -6%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
7812 Points ∼83% -14%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
7983 Points ∼85% -12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (8342 - 10450, n=5)
9401 Points ∼100% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3227 - 10450, n=341)
4920 Points ∼52% -46%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10985 Points ∼86%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
12535 Points ∼98% +14%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
12778 Points ∼100% +16%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
10590 Points ∼83% -4%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
9793 Points ∼77% -11%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
9689 Points ∼76% -12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (10330 - 14439, n=5)
11923 Points ∼93% +9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4290 - 14439, n=509)
5369 Points ∼42% -51%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3754 Points ∼86%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
3030 Points ∼69% -19%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
4364 Points ∼100% +16%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
4381 Points ∼100% +17%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
3681 Points ∼84% -2%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
2925 Points ∼67% -22%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
2215 Points ∼51% -41%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3754 - 4535, n=5)
4234 Points ∼97% +13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 4535, n=355)
1815 Points ∼41% -52%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7076 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
5061 Points ∼72% -28%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
4250 Points ∼60% -40%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
3718 Points ∼53% -47%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
5877 Points ∼83% -17%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
5371 Points ∼76% -24%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4471 Points ∼63% -37%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (6951 - 7115, n=5)
7068 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (76 - 8206, n=355)
1554 Points ∼22% -78%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5913 Points ∼96%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
4405 Points ∼72% -26%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
4275 Points ∼70% -28%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
3847 Points ∼63% -35%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
5189 Points ∼84% -12%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
4529 Points ∼74% -23%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
3646 Points ∼59% -38%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (5913 - 6312, n=5)
6147 Points ∼100% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (94 - 6312, n=358)
1451 Points ∼24% -75%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3788 Points ∼86%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
2880 Points ∼65% -24%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
4407 Points ∼100% +16%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
4393 Points ∼100% +16%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
3374 Points ∼77% -11%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
3087 Points ∼70% -19%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
2181 Points ∼49% -42%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3788 - 4462, n=5)
4206 Points ∼95% +11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 4493, n=370)
1791 Points ∼41% -53%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10291 Points ∼73%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
14085 Points ∼100% +37%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
5854 Points ∼42% -43%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
5327 Points ∼38% -48%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
8397 Points ∼60% -18%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
4449 Points ∼32% -57%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
5328 Points ∼38% -48%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (10028 - 10420, n=5)
10268 Points ∼73% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (131 - 14951, n=370)
2145 Points ∼15% -79%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7449 Points ∼96%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
7555 Points ∼97% +1%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
5456 Points ∼70% -27%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
5087 Points ∼65% -32%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
6310 Points ∼81% -15%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
4052 Points ∼52% -46%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4034 Points ∼52% -46%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (7449 - 7980, n=5)
7771 Points ∼100% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (159 - 7980, n=371)
1825 Points ∼23% -76%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3758 Points ∼90%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
3121 Points ∼75% -17%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
4183 Points ∼100% +11%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
4175 Points ∼100% +11%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
3537 Points ∼85% -6%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
2977 Points ∼71% -21%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
2137 Points ∼51% -43%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3758 - 4262, n=5)
4039 Points ∼97% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (486 - 4262, n=431)
1744 Points ∼42% -54%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6355 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
3806 Points ∼60% -40%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
4206 Points ∼66% -34%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
4256 Points ∼67% -33%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
5241 Points ∼82% -18%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
5186 Points ∼82% -18%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4010 Points ∼63% -37%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (6233 - 6362, n=5)
6307 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (65 - 6362, n=433)
1283 Points ∼20% -80%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5509 Points ∼98%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
3629 Points ∼65% -34%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
4201 Points ∼75% -24%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
4238 Points ∼76% -23%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4734 Points ∼84% -14%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
4452 Points ∼79% -19%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
3356 Points ∼60% -39%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (5509 - 5734, n=5)
5605 Points ∼100% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (80 - 5734, n=441)
1229 Points ∼22% -78%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3614 Points ∼86%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
2960 Points ∼70% -18%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
4150 Points ∼98% +15%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
4214 Points ∼100% +17%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
3483 Points ∼83% -4%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
2875 Points ∼68% -20%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
2124 Points ∼50% -41%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3614 - 4240, n=5)
3968 Points ∼94% +10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (512 - 4240, n=464)
1650 Points ∼39% -54%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9963 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
7806 Points ∼78% -22%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
5305 Points ∼53% -47%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
5252 Points ∼53% -47%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
8272 Points ∼83% -17%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
5303 Points ∼53% -47%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
6243 Points ∼63% -37%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (9653 - 10008, n=5)
9890 Points ∼99% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 10008, n=464)
1752 Points ∼18% -82%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7166 Points ∼97%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
5724 Points ∼77% -20%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
4996 Points ∼67% -30%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
4979 Points ∼67% -31%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
6336 Points ∼85% -12%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
4465 Points ∼60% -38%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4363 Points ∼59% -39%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (7166 - 7673, n=5)
7422 Points ∼100% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 7673, n=472)
1503 Points ∼20% -79%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
25339 Points ∼68%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
27413 Points ∼74% +8%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
36755 Points ∼99% +45%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
37164 Points ∼100% +47%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
35022 Points ∼94% +38%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
32302 Points ∼87% +27%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
27858 Points ∼75% +10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (25339 - 45072, n=4)
34801 Points ∼94% +37%
Average of class Smartphone
  (8253 - 45072, n=624)
13499 Points ∼36% -47%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
106534 Points ∼65%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
162695 Points ∼100% +53%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
67730 Points ∼42% -36%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
67388 Points ∼41% -37%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
84998 Points ∼52% -20%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
70318 Points ∼43% -34%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
77203 Points ∼47% -28%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (106534 - 110432, n=4)
107708 Points ∼66% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3585 - 162695, n=624)
19492 Points ∼12% -82%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
62225 Points ∼80%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
77597 Points ∼100% +25%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
57047 Points ∼74% -8%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
57073 Points ∼74% -8%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
64534 Points ∼83% +4%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
55740 Points ∼72% -10%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
55397 Points ∼71% -11%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (62225 - 83518, n=4)
72413 Points ∼93% +16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (4164 - 83518, n=625)
16300 Points ∼21% -74%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
167 fps ∼72%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
232 fps ∼100% +39%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
120 fps ∼52% -28%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
118 fps ∼51% -29%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
152 fps ∼66% -9%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
96 fps ∼41% -43%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
120 fps ∼52% -28%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (162 - 167, n=6)
166 fps ∼72% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (6 - 251, n=651)
34 fps ∼15% -80%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
60 fps ∼98%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
60 fps ∼98% 0%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
61 fps ∼100% +2%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
60 fps ∼98% 0%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
60 fps ∼98% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
58 fps ∼95% -3%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
60 fps ∼98% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (60 - 61, n=6)
60.2 fps ∼99% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.8 - 120, n=654)
26.4 fps ∼43% -56%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
100 fps ∼76%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
132 fps ∼100% +32%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
73 fps ∼55% -27%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
67 fps ∼51% -33%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
59 fps ∼45% -41%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
67 fps ∼51% -33%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
67 fps ∼51% -33%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (97 - 102, n=6)
100 fps ∼76% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2.7 - 132, n=570)
18.6 fps ∼14% -81%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
60 fps ∼100%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
60 fps ∼100% 0%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
42 fps ∼70% -30%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
59 fps ∼98% -2%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
59 fps ∼98% -2%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
53 fps ∼88% -12%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
56 fps ∼93% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (55 - 60, n=6)
58.7 fps ∼98% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.4 - 115, n=575)
17.3 fps ∼29% -71%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
69 fps ∼78%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
88 fps ∼100% +28%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
29 fps ∼33% -58%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
50 fps ∼57% -28%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
59 fps ∼67% -14%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
67 fps ∼76% -3%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
47 fps ∼53% -32%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (41 - 71, n=6)
64.7 fps ∼74% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.6 - 88, n=432)
15.5 fps ∼18% -78%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
58 fps ∼97%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
60 fps ∼100% +3%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
26 fps ∼43% -55%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
48 fps ∼80% -17%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
53 fps ∼88% -9%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
37 fps ∼62% -36%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
45 fps ∼75% -22%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (36 - 58, n=6)
50.5 fps ∼84% -13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (3.4 - 110, n=435)
14.8 fps ∼25% -74%
GFXBench
High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
24 fps ∼41%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
59 fps ∼100% +146%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
19 fps ∼32% -21%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
20 fps ∼34% -17%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
22 fps ∼37% -8%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
16 fps ∼27% -33%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
22 fps ∼37% -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (15 - 26, n=5)
22.8 fps ∼39% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.86 - 59, n=136)
8.85 fps ∼15% -63%
2560x1440 High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
16 fps ∼80%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
20 fps ∼100% +25%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
13 fps ∼65% -19%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
14 fps ∼70% -12%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
14 fps ∼70% -12%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
17 fps ∼85% +6%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
14 fps ∼70% -12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (16 - 17, n=6)
16.4 fps ∼82% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.26 - 31, n=136)
6.1 fps ∼31% -62%
Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
37 fps ∼63%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
59 fps ∼100% +59%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
18 fps ∼31% -51%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
31 fps ∼53% -16%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
34 fps ∼58% -8%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
26 fps ∼44% -30%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
35 fps ∼59% -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (23 - 38, n=5)
34.4 fps ∼58% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.8 - 59, n=137)
13.2 fps ∼22% -64%
1920x1080 Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
41 fps ∼65%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
63 fps ∼100% +54%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
33 fps ∼52% -20%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
34 fps ∼54% -17%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
37 fps ∼59% -10%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
46 fps ∼73% +12%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
34 fps ∼54% -17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (40.7 - 43, n=6)
41.8 fps ∼66% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.94 - 63, n=136)
14.7 fps ∼23% -64%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
42 fps ∼78%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
54 fps ∼100% +29%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
31 fps ∼57% -26%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
32 fps ∼59% -24%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
35 fps ∼65% -17%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
43 fps ∼80% +2%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
26 fps ∼48% -38%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (41 - 42, n=6)
41.8 fps ∼77% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.89 - 54, n=361)
10.5 fps ∼19% -75%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
38 fps ∼66%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
58 fps ∼100% +53%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
16 fps ∼28% -58%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
28 fps ∼48% -26%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
31 fps ∼53% -18%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
23 fps ∼40% -39%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
28 fps ∼48% -26%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (21 - 38, n=6)
31.7 fps ∼55% -17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.6 - 58, n=365)
9.41 fps ∼16% -75%
Basemark GPU
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
37.41 fps ∼100%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
29.12 (min: 9.74, max: 74.17) fps ∼78% -22%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
35.34 fps ∼94% -6%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
32.26 (min: 8.31, max: 85.07) fps ∼86% -14%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (33.1 - 37.4, n=3)
35.9 fps ∼96% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0 - 651, n=57)
27 fps ∼72% -28%
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
32.2 fps ∼100%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
16.92 (min: 6.06, max: 28.78) fps ∼53% -47%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
29.68 fps ∼92% -8%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
27.18 (min: 8.36, max: 46.5) fps ∼84% -16%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (22.7 - 32.2, n=2)
27.5 fps ∼85% -15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0 - 606, n=53)
23.6 fps ∼73% -27%
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
35.63 fps ∼93%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
25.57 (min: 7.38, max: 46.96) fps ∼66% -28%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
32.86 fps ∼85% -8%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
38.5 (min: 9.69, max: 72.94) fps ∼100% +8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (24.5 - 36.3, n=3)
32.2 fps ∼84% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0 - 739, n=52)
29.1 fps ∼76% -18%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
374820 Points ∼100%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
300617 Points ∼80% -20%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
306296 Points ∼82% -18%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
294488 Points ∼79% -21%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
333277 Points ∼89% -11%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (217967 - 374820, n=6)
343983 Points ∼92% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (63421 - 374820, n=253)
127177 Points ∼34% -66%
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
257246 Points ∼94%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
250848 Points ∼92% -2%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
252800 Points ∼92% -2%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
228939 Points ∼84% -11%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
273655 Points ∼100% +6%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
234421 Points ∼86% -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (244882 - 263002, n=6)
257160 Points ∼94% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (23275 - 274007, n=460)
83838 Points ∼31% -67%
VRMark - Amber Room (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4964 Score ∼99%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
5025 Score ∼100% +1%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4716 Score ∼94% -5%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
4967 Score ∼99% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (4486 - 4969, n=3)
4806 Score ∼96% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (927 - 5025, n=53)
2018 Score ∼40% -59%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
1378 Points ∼80%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
1722 Points ∼100% +25%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
1424 Points ∼83% +3%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
1404 Points ∼82% +2%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
1398 Points ∼81% +1%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
1383 Points ∼80% 0%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
1292 Points ∼75% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (1264 - 1415, n=5)
1366 Points ∼79% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1731, n=583)
732 Points ∼43% -47%
Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9270 Points ∼58%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
15969 Points ∼100% +72%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
6273 Points ∼39% -32%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
7484 Points ∼47% -19%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
7969 Points ∼50% -14%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
8401 Points ∼53% -9%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
7895 Points ∼49% -15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (8125 - 9477, n=5)
9109 Points ∼57% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 15969, n=583)
1887 Points ∼12% -80%
Memory (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4031 Points ∼64%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
3263 Points ∼52% -19%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
6283 Points ∼100% +56%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
5616 Points ∼89% +39%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4344 Points ∼69% +8%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
4306 Points ∼69% +7%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
3261 Points ∼52% -19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3560 - 5610, n=5)
4683 Points ∼75% +16%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 6283, n=583)
1408 Points ∼22% -65%
System (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
8441 Points ∼71%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
11946 Points ∼100% +42%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
8604 Points ∼72% +2%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
8594 Points ∼72% +2%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
8156 Points ∼68% -3%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
8344 Points ∼70% -1%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
6620 Points ∼55% -22%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (5993 - 9143, n=5)
8307 Points ∼70% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 12202, n=583)
2792 Points ∼23% -67%
Overall (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4595 Points ∼80%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
5721 Points ∼100% +25%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
4687 Points ∼82% +2%
Honor View 20
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192
4746 Points ∼83% +3%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
4458 Points ∼78% -3%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
4520 Points ∼79% -2%
Xiaomi Mi 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
3852 Points ∼67% -16%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3847 - 5089, n=5)
4686 Points ∼82% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (150 - 6097, n=587)
1385 Points ∼24% -70%
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
1415 Points ∼51%
Apple iPhone XR
Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072
2754 Points ∼100% +95%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144
1571 Points ∼57% +11%
OnePlus 6T
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144
1201 Points ∼44% -15%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192
1928 Points ∼70% +36%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (1075 - 1425, n=3)
1305 Points ∼47% -8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (35 - 2754, n=95)
717 Points ∼26% -49%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0)
267.84 Points ∼100% +142%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)
110.54 Points ∼41%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
109.18 Points ∼41% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (90.8 - 118, n=4)
109 Points ∼41% -1%
Honor View 20 (Chrome 71)
108.07 Points ∼40% -2%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus (Samsung Browser 9.0)
91.774 Points ∼34% -17%
Average of class Smartphone (17.6 - 23832, n=489)
86.9 Points ∼32% -21%
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70)
86.123 Points ∼32% -22%
Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72)
75.483 Points ∼28% -32%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0)
42897 Points ∼100% +75%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)
24534 Points ∼57%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
23285 Points ∼54% -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (17011 - 25051, n=6)
22503 Points ∼52% -8%
Honor View 20 (Chrome 71)
22500 Points ∼52% -8%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus (Samsung Browser 9.0)
20849 Points ∼49% -15%
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70)
16824 Points ∼39% -31%
Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72)
15086 Points ∼35% -39%
Average of class Smartphone (3126 - 43280, n=643)
6107 Points ∼14% -75%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=662)
10916 ms * ∼100% -483%
Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72)
2818 ms * ∼26% -50%
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70)
2281.6 ms * ∼21% -22%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (1873 - 2611, n=5)
2187 ms * ∼20% -17%
Honor View 20 (Chrome 71)
2048.1 ms * ∼19% -9%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
1951.9 ms * ∼18% -4%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)
1873.2 ms * ∼17%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus (Samsung Browser 9.0)
1856.6 ms * ∼17% +1%
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0)
610.3 ms * ∼6% +67%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0)
161 Points ∼100% +49%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
124 Points ∼77% +15%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus (Samsung Browser 9.0)
115 Points ∼71% +6%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)
108 Points ∼67%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (94 - 114, n=6)
106 Points ∼66% -2%
Honor View 20 (Chrome 71)
99 Points ∼61% -8%
Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72)
83 Points ∼52% -23%
Average of class Smartphone (23 - 161, n=115)
64.2 Points ∼40% -41%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0)
343 Points ∼100%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
334 Points ∼97%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus (Samsung Browser 9.0)
314 Points ∼92%
Honor View 20 (Chrome 71)
263 Points ∼77%
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70)
260 Points ∼76%
Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72)
245 Points ∼71%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (260 - 316, n=3)
192 Points ∼56%
Average of class Smartphone (66 - 362, n=324)
119 Points ∼35%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Points ∼0%

* ... smaller is better

Xiaomi Mi 9Huawei Mate 20 ProHonor View 20OnePlus 6TSamsung Galaxy S10 PlusXiaomi Mi 8Average 64 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-5%
-3%
-33%
-28%
-35%
-29%
-75%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
72.38 (Huawei NanoSD 128 GB)
60.74 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
50.8 (17.1 - 71.9, n=26)
48.2 (9.5 - 87.1, n=390)
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
83.18 (Huawei NanoSD 128 GB)
73 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
67.1 (18 - 86.6, n=26)
66.3 (8.1 - 96.5, n=390)
Random Write 4KB
165.32
157.84
-5%
138.85
-16%
22
-87%
22.7
-86%
21
-87%
53.8 (8.77 - 165, n=35)
-67%
19.2 (0.14 - 250, n=693)
-88%
Random Read 4KB
149.36
157.42
5%
168.91
13%
138.5
-7%
135.16
-10%
136.3
-9%
134 (78.2 - 173, n=35)
-10%
43.8 (1.59 - 175, n=693)
-71%
Sequential Write 256KB
388.27
196.39
-49%
250.06
-36%
204.4
-47%
249.06
-36%
207.8
-46%
198 (133 - 388, n=35)
-49%
90.2 (2.99 - 392, n=693)
-77%
Sequential Read 256KB
666.06
853.28
28%
847.48
27%
735.3
10%
811.17
22%
693.2
4%
725 (529 - 895, n=35)
9%
254 (12.1 - 1468, n=693)
-62%
Carga Máxima
 31 °C31.8 °C30 °C 
 31.8 °C30.7 °C30.1 °C 
 31.3 °C31.4 °C30.2 °C 
Máximo: 31.8 °C
Médio: 30.9 °C
28.8 °C30.3 °C30.5 °C
28.5 °C30 °C30.8 °C
29 °C30.2 °C30.9 °C
Máximo: 30.9 °C
Médio: 29.9 °C
alimentação elétrica  26.1 °C | Temperatura do quarto 21.6 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 30.9 °C / 88 F, compared to the average of 33.1 °C / 92 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 31.8 °C / 89 F, compared to the average of 35.6 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 30.9 °C / 88 F, compared to the average of 34.1 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.9 °C / 82 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2039.432.92528.325.43118.726.54026.725.95033.229.46322.622.78021.822.210024.43112523.839.216018.550.420017.149.125017.853.831515.556.140014.162.55001467.963013.869.180014.773.5100015.477125015.276.6160014.376.5200014.574.9250013.971.7315014.675.9400014.178.1500014.374.3630014.574.6800014.875.71000014.8751250014.864.4160001558.2SPL26.887.1N0.871.4median 14.8median 71.7Delta1.51042.737.742.136.430.529.133.632.738.134.830.431.825.224.825.524.9262921.538.920.144.618.947.817.85418.35819.162.619.565.217.366.515.767.214.369.615.87114.874.915.470.714.766.814.361.314.768.414.870.714.267.51462.214.554.914.347.568.82881.222.2147.9median 15.7median 62.62.310.2hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseXiaomi Mi 9Xiaomi Mi 8
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Xiaomi Mi 9 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 4% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 92% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 28% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 66% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Xiaomi Mi 8 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.4% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.7% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (9.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 26% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 63% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, 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%

Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 0.01 / 0.24 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 0.67 / 1.26 / 1.29 Watt
Carga midlight 3.71 / 9.3 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Xiaomi Mi 9
3300 mAh
Apple iPhone XR
2942 mAh
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4200 mAh
Honor View 20
4000 mAh
OnePlus 6T
3700 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
4100 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 8
3400 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
-38%
-35%
-58%
-11%
-30%
-76%
-16%
-20%
Idle Minimum *
0.67
0.61
9%
0.95
-42%
0.97
-45%
0.7
-4%
0.73
-9%
1.5
-124%
0.81 (0.6 - 1.2, n=6)
-21%
0.881 (0.2 - 3.4, n=724)
-31%
Idle Average *
1.26
2.67
-112%
2.17
-72%
2.58
-105%
1.1
13%
1.53
-21%
2.2
-75%
1.42 (1.01 - 2.2, n=6)
-13%
1.737 (0.6 - 6.2, n=723)
-38%
Idle Maximum *
1.29
2.69
-109%
2.25
-74%
2.63
-104%
2.1
-63%
2.07
-60%
2.6
-102%
1.85 (1.13 - 2.9, n=6)
-43%
2.02 (0.74 - 6.6, n=724)
-57%
Load Average *
3.71
4.34
-17%
4.47
-20%
5.24
-41%
4.2
-13%
6.03
-63%
6.1
-64%
4.27 (3.64 - 5.5, n=6)
-15%
4.06 (0.8 - 10.8, n=718)
-9%
Load Maximum *
9.3
5.66
39%
6.15
34%
8.73
6%
8.3
11%
9.18
1%
10.9
-17%
8.39 (7.49 - 9.3, n=6)
10%
5.86 (1.2 - 14.2, n=718)
37%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria
Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)
27h 30min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
9h 06min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
16h 48min
Carga (máximo brilho)
3h 14min
Xiaomi Mi 9
3300 mAh
Apple iPhone XR
2942 mAh
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4200 mAh
Honor View 20
4000 mAh
OnePlus 6T
3700 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus
4100 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 8
3400 mAh
Battery Runtime
47%
19%
25%
25%
-8%
9%
Reader / Idle
1650
2969
80%
1747
6%
1928
17%
1936
17%
1560
-5%
1634
-1%
H.264
1008
1011
0%
854
-15%
932
-8%
903
-10%
921
-9%
897
-11%
WiFi v1.3
546
910
67%
767
40%
969
77%
865
58%
483
-12%
736
35%
Load
194
270
39%
282
45%
222
14%
261
35%
187
-4%
215
11%

Pro

+ Carcaça de vidro premium
+ Wi-Fi rápido
+ GPS preciso
+ Dual SIM
+ Widevine DRM L1-certified
+ Excelentes câmeras traseiras triplas
+ Sensor de digitais veloz
+ Reconhecimento facial rápido
+ Tela OLED impressionante
+ SoC poderoso
+ Armazenamento flash UFS 2.1
+ Carregamento sem fio
+ Carga rápida 4.0

Contra

- A carcaça recolhe digitais facilmente
- Não é resistente à água ou à poeira
- O dispositivo não fica plano por causa de suas câmeras triplas traseiras
- Sem slot para cartões microSD
- Porta Type-C opera apenas com USB 2.0
- Sem conector para fones
- PWM
- Duração da bateria abaixo do esperado
The Xiaomi Mi 9 smartphone review. Test device courtesy of TradingShenzhen.
The Xiaomi Mi 9 smartphone review. Test device courtesy of TradingShenzhen.

O Xiaomi Mi 9 é um smartphone triunfante que envergonha outros carros chefe por seu incrível valor pelo dinheiro. O modelo básico, que tem 6 GB de RAM e 64 GB de armazenamento, está bem equipado pelos padrões modernos de carros chefe. No entanto, o modelo de 128 GB pode ser uma escolha melhor para muitas pessoas porque o Mi 9 não suporta armazenamento expansível.

A Xiaomi equipou todos os modelos Mi 9 com excelentes câmeras traseiras triplas e uma tela AMOLED brilhante com precisão de cor exemplar, que cabe em uma carcaça de vidro elegante e de alta qualidade. O novo SoC Snapdragon 855 da Qualcomm também faz do Mi 9 um dos smartphones mais poderosos que o dinheiro pode comprar atualmente. Isso vai mudar com o lançamento de mais smartphones Snapdragon 855.

O Xiaomi Mi 9 é o smartphone para comprar se você está atrás de uma experiência de carro chefe, mas com um orçamento. Oferece tudo o que seus concorrentes oferecem, mas sem precisar gastar uma fortuna.

Embora tenhamos algumas queixas, como a falta de um fone de ouvido e nenhum suporte para cartão microSD, o Mi 9 está em boa companhia com muitos de seus concorrentes que também não têm esses recursos. A carcaça de vidro elegante também é propensa a digitais, e o compartimento da câmera traseira tripla faz o dispositivo balançar em uma mesa, mas esses problemas não prejudicam o que é uma das melhores experiências de smartphone que o dinheiro pode comprar no início de 2019.

Xiaomi Mi 9 - 03/27/2019 v6
Manuel Masiero

Acabamento
85%
Teclado
67 / 75 → 89%
Mouse
95%
Conectividade
46 / 60 → 76%
Peso
90%
Bateria
94%
Pantalha
91%
Desempenho do jogos
72 / 63 → 100%
Desempenho da aplicação
82 / 70 → 100%
Temperatura
94%
Ruído
100%
Audio
69 / 91 → 76%
Camera
80%
Médio
82%
89%
Smartphone - Médio equilibrado

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Smartphone Xiaomi Mi 9
Manuel Masiero, 2019-03-31 (Update: 2019-04- 8)