Breve Análise do Smartphone Xiaomi Mi 9

Name: Xiaomi Mi 9
Brand: Xiaomi

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.

Manuel Masiero, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, ✓ Felicitas Krohn (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), Published 03/31/2019 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...

Android Smartphone Touchscreen

Test device courtesy of TradingShenzhen

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Xiaomi Mi 9 (Mi 9 Serie)

Processador

Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 8 x 2.8 GHz, Cortex-A76 / A55 (Kryo 485)

Placa gráfica

Qualcomm Adreno 640

Memória

6 GB

, 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, 60 Hz

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 = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), 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.

see all specifications

Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Huawei Mate 20 Pro Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	696 (647^min - 714^max) MBit/s +30%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	663 (289^min - 805^max) MBit/s +24%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	650 (6^min - 792^max) MBit/s +22%
Apple iPhone XR A12 Bionic GPU, A12 Bionic, 128 GB NVMe	644 (578^min - 672^max) MBit/s +21%
Xiaomi Mi 9 Adreno 640, SD 855, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	534 (430^min - 578^max) MBit/s
OnePlus 6T Adreno 630, SD 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	474 (241^min - 497^max) MBit/s -11%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Mali-G76 MP12, Exynos 9820, 512 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	457 (398^min - 508^max) MBit/s -14%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Adreno 630, SD 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	429 (256^min - 448^max) MBit/s -20%
Honor View 20 Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	298 (278^min - 319^max) MBit/s -44%
iperf3 receive AX12
Huawei Mate 20 Pro Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	1001 (209^min - 1106^max) MBit/s +48%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	615 (532^min - 642^max) MBit/s -9%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	491 (100^min - 534^max) MBit/s -28%
Xiaomi Mi 9 Adreno 640, SD 855, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	678 (549^min - 725^max) MBit/s
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Mali-G76 MP12, Exynos 9820, 512 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	633 (561^min - 684^max) MBit/s -7%
OnePlus 6T Adreno 630, SD 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	629 (621^min - 638^max) MBit/s -7%
Apple iPhone XR A12 Bionic GPU, A12 Bionic, 128 GB NVMe	517 (477^min - 528^max) MBit/s -24%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Adreno 630, SD 845, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	491 (444^min - 499^max) MBit/s -28%
Average of class Smartphone (last 2 years)	376 MBit/s -45%
Honor View 20 Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 256 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	339 (325^min - 351^max) MBit/s -50%

Xiaomi Mi 9; iperf3 receive AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø678 (549-725)

Xiaomi Mi 9; iperf3 transmit AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø534 (430-578)

GPS Test: Samsung Galaxy S10+ - Overview

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 1 Scene 2 Scene 3

click to load images

click to load images

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

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2

Máximo: 601 cd/m² (Nits) 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 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 1.5 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
95.4% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.27

	Xiaomi Mi 9 AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.39	Apple iPhone XR IPS, 1792x828, 6.10	Huawei Mate 20 Pro OLED, 3120x1440, 6.30	Honor View 20 LTPS, 2310x1080, 6.40	OnePlus 6T Optic AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.41	Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus OLED, 3040x1440, 6.40	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 dE 2000 *	0.9	1.3 -44%	1.3 -44%	2.4 -167%	2.21 -146%	3.7 -311%	5.09 -466%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	2	2.7 -35%	3.5 -75%	5.2 -160%	4.27 -114%	10.3 -415%	8.05 -303%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	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)

ℹ

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.

Screen flickering / PWM detected

245.1 Hz

≤ 99 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 245.1 Hz (worst case, e.g., 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: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17900 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

Display Response Times

ℹ

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.

↔ Response Time Black to White
4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 2 ms rise
4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 11 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21.5 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
4.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 2.4 ms rise
4.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 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 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 11 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (33.7 ms).

Geekbench 4.4
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	3523 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	4750 Points +35%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	3378 Points -4%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	3314 Points -6%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	2384 Points -32%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	4505 Points +28%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	2430 Points -31%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (3406 - 3537, n=14)	3480 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone (934 - 9574, n=91, last 2 years)	5228 Points +48%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	10999 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	11276 Points +3%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	10024 Points -9%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	9868 Points -10%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	8995 Points -18%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	10259 Points -7%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	8907 Points -19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (10187 - 11388, n=14)	10955 Points 0%
Average of class Smartphone (2630 - 26990, n=91, last 2 years)	14045 Points +28%
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	7482 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	21070 Points +182%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	8938 Points +19%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	9028 Points +21%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	13341 Points +78%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	10177 Points +36%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	13371 Points +79%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (7372 - 8024, n=12)	7629 Points +2%
Average of class Smartphone (2053 - 18432, n=72, last 2 years)	10872 Points +45%

PCMark for Android
Work performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	10985 Points
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	12535 Points +14%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	12778 Points +16%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	10590 Points -4%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	9793 Points -11%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	9689 Points -12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (10330 - 14439, n=19)	12161 Points +11%
Average of class Smartphone (10884 - 19297, n=2, last 2 years)	15091 Points +37%
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	9035 Points
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	9225 Points +2%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	9243 Points +2%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	8487 Points -6%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	7812 Points -14%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	7983 Points -12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (8342 - 11440, n=19)	9710 Points +7%
Average of class Smartphone (9101 - 12871, n=4, last 2 years)	10872 Points +20%

3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	62225 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	77597 Points +25%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	57047 Points -8%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	57073 Points -8%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	64534 Points +4%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	55740 Points -10%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	55397 Points -11%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (55771 - 83518, n=17)	70036 Points +13%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	106534 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	162695 Points +53%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	67730 Points -36%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	67388 Points -37%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	84998 Points -20%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	70318 Points -34%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	77203 Points -28%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (97354 - 110432, n=17)	105781 Points -1%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	25339 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	27413 Points +8%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	36755 Points +45%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	37164 Points +47%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	35022 Points +38%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	32302 Points +27%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	27858 Points +10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (20636 - 45072, n=18)	32923 Points +30%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	7166 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	5724 Points -20%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	4996 Points -30%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	4979 Points -31%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	6336 Points -12%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	4465 Points -38%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	4363 Points -39%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (5251 - 7820, n=18)	7091 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone (712 - 7285, n=50, last 2 years)	3766 Points -47%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	9963 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	7806 Points -22%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	5305 Points -47%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	5252 Points -47%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	8272 Points -17%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	5303 Points -47%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	6243 Points -37%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (6122 - 10008, n=18)	9272 Points -7%
Average of class Smartphone (618 - 9451, n=50, last 2 years)	4186 Points -58%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	3614 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	2960 Points -18%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	4150 Points +15%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	4214 Points +17%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	3483 Points -4%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	2875 Points -20%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	2124 Points -41%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (3001 - 4618, n=18)	3925 Points +9%
Average of class Smartphone (1093 - 4525, n=50, last 2 years)	3082 Points -15%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	7449 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	7555 Points +1%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	5456 Points -27%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	5087 Points -32%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	6310 Points -15%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	4052 Points -46%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	4034 Points -46%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (5268 - 8141, n=18)	7186 Points -4%
Average of class Smartphone (704 - 23024, n=114, last 2 years)	9351 Points +26%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	10291 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	14085 Points +37%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	5854 Points -43%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	5327 Points -48%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	8397 Points -18%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	4449 Points -57%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	5328 Points -48%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (6358 - 10420, n=18)	9569 Points -7%
Average of class Smartphone (607 - 45492, n=113, last 2 years)	16352 Points +59%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	3788 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	2880 Points -24%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	4407 Points +16%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	4393 Points +16%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	3374 Points -11%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	3087 Points -19%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	2181 Points -42%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (2345 - 4703, n=18)	3892 Points +3%
Average of class Smartphone (1075 - 8749, n=113, last 2 years)	4426 Points +17%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	5509 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	3629 Points -34%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	4201 Points -24%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	4238 Points -23%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	4734 Points -14%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	4452 Points -19%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	3356 Points -39%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (4556 - 5747, n=20)	5489 Points 0%
Average of class Smartphone (286 - 7890, n=105, last 2 years)	2755 Points -50%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	6355 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	3806 Points -40%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	4206 Points -34%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	4256 Points -33%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	5241 Points -18%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	5186 Points -18%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	4010 Points -37%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (5429 - 6362, n=20)	6201 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone (240 - 9814, n=105, last 2 years)	2751 Points -57%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	3758 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	3121 Points -17%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	4183 Points +11%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	4175 Points +11%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	3537 Points -6%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	2977 Points -21%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	2137 Points -43%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (2705 - 4612, n=20)	3954 Points +5%
Average of class Smartphone (858 - 4679, n=105, last 2 years)	3163 Points -16%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	5913 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	4405 Points -26%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	4275 Points -28%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	3847 Points -35%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	5189 Points -12%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	4529 Points -23%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	3646 Points -38%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (3969 - 6404, n=20)	5819 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone (317 - 20131, n=182, last 2 years)	6737 Points +14%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	7076 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	5061 Points -28%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	4250 Points -40%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	3718 Points -47%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	5877 Points -17%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	5371 Points -24%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	4471 Points -37%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (5184 - 7148, n=20)	6793 Points -4%
Average of class Smartphone (267 - 33376, n=181, last 2 years)	9723 Points +37%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	3754 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	3030 Points -19%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	4364 Points +16%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	4381 Points +17%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	3681 Points -2%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	2925 Points -22%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	2215 Points -41%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (1934 - 5024, n=20)	3942 Points +5%
Average of class Smartphone (938 - 8480, n=181, last 2 years)	4224 Points +13%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	60 fps
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	60 fps 0%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	61 fps +2%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	60 fps 0%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	60 fps 0%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	58 fps -3%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	60 fps 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (59 - 91, n=20)	63.4 fps +6%
Average of class Smartphone (22 - 165, n=183, last 2 years)	84.6 fps +41%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	167 fps
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	232 fps +39%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	120 fps -28%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	118 fps -29%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	152 fps -9%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	96 fps -43%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	120 fps -28%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (85 - 167, n=20)	153.1 fps -8%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 791, n=183, last 2 years)	247 fps +48%

GFXBench 3.0
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	60 fps
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	60 fps 0%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	42 fps -30%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	59 fps -2%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	59 fps -2%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	53 fps -12%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	56 fps -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (46 - 85, n=20)	59.6 fps -1%
Average of class Smartphone (6.8 - 165, n=185, last 2 years)	72.2 fps +20%
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	100 fps
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	132 fps +32%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	73 fps -27%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	67 fps -33%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	59 fps -41%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	67 fps -33%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	67 fps -33%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (50 - 102, n=20)	92.3 fps -8%
Average of class Smartphone (9.2 - 363, n=185, last 2 years)	140.6 fps +41%

GFXBench 3.1
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	58 fps
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	60 fps +3%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	26 fps -55%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	48 fps -17%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	53 fps -9%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	37 fps -36%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	45 fps -22%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (27 - 58, n=20)	47.7 fps -18%
Average of class Smartphone (3.7 - 158, n=185, last 2 years)	60.9 fps +5%
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	69 fps
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	88 fps +28%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	29 fps -58%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	50 fps -28%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	59 fps -14%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	67 fps -3%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	47 fps -32%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (35 - 71, n=20)	62 fps -10%
Average of class Smartphone (6.2 - 279, n=185, last 2 years)	99 fps +43%

GFXBench
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	38 fps
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	58 fps +53%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	16 fps -58%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	28 fps -26%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	31 fps -18%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	23 fps -39%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	28 fps -26%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (16 - 41, n=20)	31.7 fps -17%
Average of class Smartphone (5 - 117, n=185, last 2 years)	43.4 fps +14%
1920x1080 Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	42 fps
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	54 fps +29%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	31 fps -26%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	32 fps -24%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	35 fps -17%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	43 fps +2%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	26 fps -38%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (22 - 43, n=20)	39.2 fps -7%
Average of class Smartphone (2.9 - 166, n=185, last 2 years)	59.9 fps +43%
on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	37 fps
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	59 fps +59%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	18 fps -51%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	31 fps -16%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	34 fps -8%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	26 fps -30%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	35 fps -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (17 - 38, n=20)	32.5 fps -12%
Average of class Smartphone (3.6 - 123, n=226, last 2 years)	44 fps +19%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	41 fps
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	63 fps +54%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	33 fps -20%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	34 fps -17%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	37 fps -10%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	46 fps +12%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	34 fps -17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (22 - 43, n=21)	39.9 fps -3%
Average of class Smartphone (2.3 - 229, n=226, last 2 years)	64.3 fps +57%
on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	24 fps
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	59 fps +146%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	19 fps -21%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	20 fps -17%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	22 fps -8%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	16 fps -33%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	22 fps -8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (11 - 26, n=20)	20.9 fps -13%
Average of class Smartphone (2.8 - 119, n=226, last 2 years)	32.8 fps +37%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	16 fps
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	20 fps +25%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	13 fps -19%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	14 fps -12%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	14 fps -12%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	17 fps +6%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	14 fps -12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (8.5 - 24, n=21)	16.2 fps +1%
Average of class Smartphone (0.85 - 94, n=226, last 2 years)	25.6 fps +60%

Basemark GPU 1.1
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	35.63 fps
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	25.57 (7.38^min - 46.96^max) fps -28%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	32.86 fps -8%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	38.5 (9.69^min - 72.94^max) fps +8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (24.5 - 36.3, n=3)	32.2 fps -10%
Vulkan Medium Native (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	32.2 fps
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	16.92 (6.06^min - 28.78^max) fps -47%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	29.68 fps -8%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	27.18 (8.36^min - 46.5^max) fps -16%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (22.7 - 32.2, n=2)	27.5 fps -15%
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	37.41 fps
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	29.12 (9.74^min - 74.17^max) fps -22%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	35.34 fps -6%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	32.26 (8.31^min - 85.07^max) fps -14%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (33.1 - 37.4, n=3)	35.9 fps -4%

AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	374820 Points
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	300617 Points -20%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	306296 Points -18%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	294488 Points -21%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	333277 Points -11%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (217967 - 398720, n=16)	354450 Points -5%

AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	257246 Points
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	250848 Points -2%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	252800 Points -2%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	228939 Points -11%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	273655 Points +6%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	234421 Points -9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (239512 - 268271, n=12)	255436 Points -1%

VRMark - Amber Room (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	4964 Score
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	5025 Score +1%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	4716 Score -5%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	4967 Score 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (4486 - 4969, n=3)	4806 Score -3%
Average of class Smartphone (2523 - 10071, n=12, last 2 years)	5985 Score +21%

BaseMark OS II
Overall (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	4595 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	5721 Points +25%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	4687 Points +2%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	4746 Points +3%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	4458 Points -3%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	4520 Points -2%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	3852 Points -16%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (3847 - 5397, n=19)	4796 Points +4%
Average of class Smartphone (411 - 11438, n=166, last 2 years)	5759 Points +25%
System (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	8441 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	11946 Points +42%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	8604 Points +2%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	8594 Points +2%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	8156 Points -3%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	8344 Points -1%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	6620 Points -22%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (5993 - 9143, n=19)	8539 Points +1%
Average of class Smartphone (2376 - 16475, n=166, last 2 years)	9672 Points +15%
Memory (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	4031 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	3263 Points -19%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	6283 Points +56%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	5616 Points +39%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	4344 Points +8%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	4306 Points +7%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	3261 Points -19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (2661 - 7500, n=19)	5097 Points +26%
Average of class Smartphone (670 - 12716, n=166, last 2 years)	6267 Points +55%
Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	9270 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	15969 Points +72%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	6273 Points -32%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	7484 Points -19%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	7969 Points -14%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	8401 Points -9%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	7895 Points -15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (8125 - 9510, n=19)	9174 Points -1%
Average of class Smartphone (697 - 58651, n=166, last 2 years)	14220 Points +53%
Web (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	1378 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	1722 Points +25%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	1424 Points +3%
Honor View 20 HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 8192	1404 Points +2%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	1398 Points +1%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	1383 Points 0%
Xiaomi Mi 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	1292 Points -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (1076 - 1601, n=19)	1356 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone (10 - 2145, n=166, last 2 years)	1495 Points +8%

Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144	1415 Points
Apple iPhone XR Apple A12 Bionic, A12 Bionic GPU, 3072	2754 Points +95%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, Mali-G76 MP10, 6144	1571 Points +11%
OnePlus 6T Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Adreno 630, 6144	1201 Points -15%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus Samsung Exynos 9820, Mali-G76 MP12, 8192	1928 Points +36%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (1075 - 1425, n=4)	1334 Points -6%
Average of class Smartphone (177 - 6114, n=58, last 2 years)	2240 Points +58%

JetStream 1.1 | Octane V2 | Mozilla Kraken 1.1 | WebXPRT 3 | WebXPRT 2015

JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0)	267.8 Points +142%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)	110.5 Points
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)	109.2 Points -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (84.4 - 120, n=17)	108.4 Points -2%
Honor View 20 (Chrome 71)	108.1 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone (last 2 years)	104.3 Points -6%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus (Samsung Browser 9.0)	91.8 Points -17%
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70)	86.1 Points -22%
Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72)	75.5 Points -32%

Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0)	42897 Points +75%
Average of class Smartphone (4633 - 89112, n=213, last 2 years)	33503 Points +37%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)	24534 Points
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (17011 - 33918, n=21)	23749 Points -3%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)	23285 Points -5%
Honor View 20 (Chrome 71)	22500 Points -8%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus (Samsung Browser 9.0)	20849 Points -15%
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70)	16824 Points -31%
Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72)	15086 Points -39%

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72)	2818 ms * -50%
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70)	2282 ms * -22%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (1852 - 2611, n=19)	2147 ms * -15%
Honor View 20 (Chrome 71)	2048 ms * -9%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)	1952 ms * -4%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)	1873 ms *
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus (Samsung Browser 9.0)	1857 ms * +1%
Average of class Smartphone (388 - 9999, n=173, last 2 years)	1595 ms * +15%
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0)	610 ms * +67%

WebXPRT 3 - Overall
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0)	161 Points +49%
Average of class Smartphone (39 - 304, n=122, last 2 years)	133.1 Points +23%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)	124 Points +15%
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus (Samsung Browser 9.0)	115 Points +6%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)	108 Points
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (90 - 129, n=20)	105.2 Points -3%
Honor View 20 (Chrome 71)	99 Points -8%
Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72)	83 Points -23%

WebXPRT 2015 - Overall
Apple iPhone XR (Safari Mobile 12.0)	343 Points
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)	334 Points
Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus (Samsung Browser 9.0)	314 Points
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (260 - 316, n=2)	288 Points
Honor View 20 (Chrome 71)	263 Points
OnePlus 6T (Chrome 70)	260 Points
Xiaomi Mi 8 (Chrome 72)	245 Points
Xiaomi Mi 9	Points

* ... smaller is better

	Xiaomi Mi 9	Huawei Mate 20 Pro	Honor View 20	OnePlus 6T	Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus	Xiaomi Mi 8	Average 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash	Average of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5		-5%	-3%	-33%	-28%	-35%	-24%	111%
Sequential Read 256KB	666	853 28%	847 27%	735 10%	811 22%	693 4%	696 ?(392 - 895, n=52) 5%	1508 ?(226 - 4512, n=218, last 2 years) 126%
Sequential Write 256KB	388.3	196.4 -49%	250.1 -36%	204.4 -47%	249.1 -36%	207.8 -46%	224 ?(132.7 - 512, n=52) -42%	1118 ?(57.5 - 3678, n=218, last 2 years) 188%
Random Read 4KB	149.4	157.4 5%	168.9 13%	138.5 -7%	135.2 -10%	136.3 -9%	137.2 ?(78.2 - 192, n=52) -8%	247 ?(22.2 - 543, n=218, last 2 years) 65%
Random Write 4KB	165.3	157.8 -5%	138.9 -16%	22 -87%	22.7 -86%	21 -87%	84.7 ?(8.77 - 208, n=52) -49%	272 ?(13 - 709, n=218, last 2 years) 65%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard		83.2 ?(Huawei NanoSD 128 GB)			73 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)		68.6 ?(18 - 87.1, n=33)
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard		72.4 ?(Huawei NanoSD 128 GB)			60.7 ?(Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)		52.2 ?(17.1 - 71.9, n=33)

Carga Máxima

Inatividade


31 °C	31.8 °C	30 °C
31.8 °C	30.7 °C	30.1 °C
31.3 °C	31.4 °C	30.2 °C

Máximo: 31.8 °C
Médio: 30.9 °C


28.8 °C	30.3 °C	30.5 °C
28.5 °C	30 °C	30.8 °C
29 °C	30.2 °C	30.9 °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 32.7 °C / 91 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 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 56 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 30.9 °C / 88 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °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 32.7 °C / 91 F.

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 (17.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 8% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 86% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 27% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 65% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Xiaomi Mi 8 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 64.6% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 64.6% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 64.6% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (124.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 93% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 1% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 98% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 0% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Consumo de energia

desligado	0.01 / 0.24 Watt
Ocioso	0.67 / 1.26 / 1.29 Watt
Carga	3.71 / 9.3 Watt


Key: min: , med: , max: Metrahit Energy Currently we use the Metrahit Energy, a professional single phase power quality and energy measurement digital multimeter, for our measurements. Find out more about it here. All of our test methods can be found here.

	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%	-24%	-23%
Idle Minimum *	0.67	0.61 9%	0.95 -42%	0.97 -45%	0.7 -4%	0.73 -9%	1.5 -124%	0.939 ?(0.58 - 1.96, n=19) -40%	0.897 ?(0.42 - 2.37, n=162, last 2 years) -34%
Idle Average *	1.26	2.67 -112%	2.17 -72%	2.58 -105%	1.1 13%	1.53 -21%	2.2 -75%	1.506 ?(0.85 - 2.8, n=19) -20%	1.452 ?(0.69 - 4.26, n=162, last 2 years) -15%
Idle Maximum *	1.29	2.69 -109%	2.25 -74%	2.63 -104%	2.1 -63%	2.07 -60%	2.6 -102%	1.799 ?(1 - 2.9, n=19) -39%	1.629 ?(0.79 - 4.45, n=162, last 2 years) -26%
Load Average *	3.71	4.34 -17%	4.47 -20%	5.24 -41%	4.2 -13%	6.03 -63%	6.1 -64%	4.61 ?(3.64 - 5.8, n=19) -24%	5.55 ?(2.3 - 16.5, n=162, last 2 years) -50%
Load Maximum *	9.3	5.66 39%	6.15 34%	8.73 6%	8.3 11%	9.18 1%	10.9 -17%	9.04 ?(7.49 - 11.9, n=19) 3%	8.31 ?(3.53 - 20.8, n=162, last 2 years) 11%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria

Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)		27h 30min
WiFi Websurfing		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.

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 - 2022-08-31 08/31/2022 v7
Manuel Masiero

Acabamento

84%

Teclado

67 / 75 → 89%

Mouse

95%

Conectividade

50 / 70 → 71%

Peso

90%

Bateria

88%

Pantalha

92%

Desempenho do jogos

55 / 64 → 86%

Desempenho da aplicação

76 / 86 → 88%

Temperatura

94%

Ruído

100%

Audio

81 / 90 → 90%

Camera

70%

Médio

80%

86%

Smartphone - Médio equilibrado

Pricecompare

Editor of the original article: Alex Alderson - Senior Tech Writer - 9942 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2018

contact me via: @aldersonaj

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)

Breve Análise do Smartphone Xiaomi Mi 9

Size Comparison

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

Display Response Times

Xiaomi Mi 9 audio analysis

Xiaomi Mi 8 audio analysis

Pro

Contra

More articles related to this device

Pricecompare