Notebookcheck

Breve Análise do Smartphone Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro): Não é outro Mi 9 com uma câmera pop-up

Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Florian Schmitt (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), 08/05/2019

Nenhum assassino do Xiaomi Mi 9. O Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro, assim como seu modelo irmão Mi 9T, tem uma câmera frontal pop-up motorizada para ajudar na busca da maior relação tela-a-corpo possível. O dispositivo vem com um Snapdragon 855, 8 GB de RAM e 128 GB de armazenamento em flash UFS 2.1 também, mas a Xiaomi fez cortes em algumas áreas que o impedem de desafiar o Mi 9. Continue lendo para descobrir como o Mi 9T Pro, ou deveríamos dizer, o Redmi K20 Pro, se desempenha em nossos testes e como se compara com o Mi 9.

Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro (Mi Serie)
Processador
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
Placa gráfica
Qualcomm Adreno 640
Memória
8192 MB 
Pantalha
6.39 polegadas 19,5:9, 2340 x 1080 pixel 403 PPI, Capacitive multi-touch screen, AMOLED, Brilhante: sim
Disco rígido
128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 128 GB 
, 109 GB livre
Conexões
1 USB 2.0, Conexões Audio: Conector para fones de 3,5 mm, 1 Leitor de Impressões Digitais, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensores: Acelerômetro, sensor de distância, bússola eletrônica, giroscópio, OTG, Miracast, Dual-VoLTE
Funcionamento em rede
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.0, 4G/FDD/LTE: B1, B3, B5, B7, B8. 3G/WCDMA: 850, 1,900, 2,100 MHz. 2G/GSM: 850, 900, 1,800, 1,900 MHz., Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 8.8 x 156.7 x 74.3
Bateria
4000 mAh Lítio-Polímero, Qualcomm Quick Charge 4+ e carga turbo de 27 W
Sistema Operativo
Android 9.0 Pie
Camera
Primary Camera: 48 MPix Sony IMX586, f/1.75. 8 MP telephoto lens, f/2.4. 13 MP wide-angle lens, f/2.4. Camera2 API Level: 3
Secondary Camera: 20 MPix pop-up cam, f/2.2, 0.8 μm
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: Alto-falante mono na parte inferior do dispositivo, Teclado: Onscreen, Cabo de carregamento, carregador de 18 W, capa de silicone, MIUI, 12 Meses Garantia, Widevine Level L3, fanless
peso
191 g, Suprimento de energia: 41 g
Preço
410 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Mi 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro)
Mi 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro)
Mi 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro)
Mi 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro)
Mi 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro)
Mi 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro)
Mi 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro)
Mi 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro)
Mi 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro)
Mi 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro)
Mi 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro)
Mi 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro)
Mi 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro)

Size Comparison

165.2 mm 76.5 mm 9.3 mm 220 g159.1 mm 75.44 mm 9.2 mm 190 g160.1 mm 76.1 mm 8.2 mm 167 g157.7 mm 74.8 mm 8.2 mm 182 g156.7 mm 74.3 mm 8.8 mm 191 g157.5 mm 74.67 mm 7.61 mm 173 g155.3 mm 76.6 mm 7.99 mm 181 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% +77%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Adreno 616, 670, 64 GB eMMC Flash
668 (min: 617, max: 692) MBit/s ∼99% +74%
LG G8s ThinQ
Adreno 640, 855, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
578 (min: 474, max: 617) MBit/s ∼85% +51%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Adreno 640, 855, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
447 (min: 201, max: 659) MBit/s ∼66% +17%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Adreno 618, 730, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
428 (min: 360, max: 501) MBit/s ∼63% +12%
OnePlus 7
Adreno 640, 855, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
388 (min: 361, max: 421) MBit/s ∼57% +1%
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Adreno 640, 855, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
383 (min: 242, max: 434) MBit/s ∼56%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=434)
226 MBit/s ∼33% -41%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Google Pixel 3a XL
Adreno 616, 670, 64 GB eMMC Flash
580 (min: 548, max: 602) MBit/s ∼100% +49%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Adreno 640, 855, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
534 (min: 430, max: 578) MBit/s ∼92% +37%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Adreno 640, 855, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
523 (min: 410, max: 563) MBit/s ∼90% +34%
LG G8s ThinQ
Adreno 640, 855, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
502 (min: 465, max: 517) MBit/s ∼87% +29%
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Adreno 640, 855, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
389 (min: 366, max: 444) MBit/s ∼67%
OnePlus 7
Adreno 640, 855, 256 GB UFS 3.0 Flash
330 (min: 232, max: 365) MBit/s ∼57% -15%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Adreno 618, 730, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
282 (min: 249, max: 327) MBit/s ∼49% -28%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=434)
216 MBit/s ∼37% -44%
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 – Bridge
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 – Bridge
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520: Loop
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520: Loop
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 – Overview
GPS test: Garmin Edge 520 – Overview
GPS test: Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro - Bridge
GPS test: Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro - Bridge
GPS test: Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro – Loop
GPS test: Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro – Loop
GPS test: Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro - Overview
GPS test: Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro - Overview
Photographed with the Sony IMX586
Photographed with the Sony IMX586
2x zoom
2x zoom
Ultra-wide shot
Ultra-wide shot
Portrait mode
Portrait mode
Camera app settings
Camera app settings
Automatic mode settings
Automatic mode settings
Pro mode
Pro mode
Automatic mode
Automatic mode

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
A photo of our test chart
A photo of our test chart
Our test chart in detail
589
cd/m²
604
cd/m²
639
cd/m²
584
cd/m²
594
cd/m²
617
cd/m²
605
cd/m²
607
cd/m²
620
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 639 cd/m² Médio: 606.6 cd/m² Minimum: 2.4 cd/m²
iluminação: 91 %
iluminação com acumulador: 594 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Preto: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.51 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 2.6 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
142.2% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.219
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.39
Xiaomi Mi 9
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.39
OnePlus 7
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.41
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
IPS, 2340x1080, 6.4
Google Pixel 3a XL
OLED, 2160x1080, 6
Samsung Galaxy A80
AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.7
LG G8s ThinQ
P-OLED, 2248x1080, 6.2
Screen
23%
-35%
-50%
7%
-44%
-36%
Brightness middle
594
593
0%
603
2%
569
-4%
409
-31%
478
-20%
539
-9%
Brightness
607
587
-3%
605
0%
537
-12%
410
-32%
486
-20%
556
-8%
Brightness Distribution
91
94
3%
94
3%
79
-13%
96
5%
96
5%
88
-3%
Black Level *
0.31
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
1.51
0.9
40%
3.5
-132%
3.5
-132%
1.3
14%
2.97
-97%
3.78
-150%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
4.27
2
53%
7.7
-80%
6
-41%
2.3
46%
10.18
-138%
6.95
-63%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2.6
1.5
42%
2.7
-4%
5.1
-96%
1.5
42%
2.5
4%
2.2
15%
Gamma
2.219 99%
2.27 97%
2.266 97%
2.36 93%
2.22 99%
2.031 108%
2.274 97%
CCT
6390 102%
6548 99%
6775 96%
6827 95%
6621 98%
6533 99%
6013 108%
Contrast
1835

* ... 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 223 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 223 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 223 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 9354 (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
6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 3 ms rise
↘ 3 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. » 4 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 4 ms rise
↘ 3 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. » 5 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (39.7 ms).
Geekbench 4.4
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7482 Points ∼95%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
7372 Points ∼94%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7703 Points ∼98%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
6479 Points ∼82%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
7881 Points ∼100%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7442 Points ∼94%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (7372 - 8024, n=10)
7597 Points ∼96%
Average of class Smartphone
  (663 - 21070, n=319)
4690 Points ∼60%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
10976 Points ∼96%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10999 Points ∼97% 0%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
11388 Points ∼100% +4%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10878 Points ∼96% -1%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
5172 Points ∼45% -53%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
6826 Points ∼60% -38%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10274 Points ∼90% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (10187 - 11388, n=12)
10936 Points ∼96% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (883 - 11598, n=378)
4703 Points ∼41% -57%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
3429 Points ∼97%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3523 Points ∼100% +3%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
3510 Points ∼100% +2%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3444 Points ∼98% 0%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
1616 Points ∼46% -53%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
2436 Points ∼69% -29%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3406 Points ∼97% -1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3406 - 3537, n=12)
3482 Points ∼99% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (390 - 4824, n=378)
1421 Points ∼40% -59%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
9296 Points ∼95%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9035 Points ∼92% -3%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
9205 Points ∼94% -1%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9814 Points ∼100% +6%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
7377 Points ∼75% -21%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
7177 Points ∼73% -23%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9125 Points ∼93% -2%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (8342 - 11440, n=12)
9563 Points ∼97% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 11440, n=370)
5253 Points ∼54% -43%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
11167 Points ∼86%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10985 Points ∼84% -2%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
12095 Points ∼93% +8%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
13047 Points ∼100% +17%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
9397 Points ∼72% -16%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
8626 Points ∼66% -23%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
11890 Points ∼91% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (10330 - 14439, n=12)
12030 Points ∼92% +8%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 14439, n=541)
5680 Points ∼44% -49%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
2657 Points ∼80%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3288 Points ∼99% +24%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
3324 Points ∼100% +25%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
2492 Points ∼75% -6%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
2314 Points ∼70% -13%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
2708 Points ∼81% +2%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
2794 Points ∼84% +5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (2104 - 3365, n=12)
3000 Points ∼90% +13%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 15735, n=57)
2697 Points ∼81% +2%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
5702 Points ∼97%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5723 Points ∼98% 0%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
5862 Points ∼100% +3%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5747 Points ∼98% +1%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
1416 Points ∼24% -75%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
2160 Points ∼37% -62%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4236 Points ∼72% -26%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (4236 - 5884, n=12)
5576 Points ∼95% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 14536, n=57)
2792 Points ∼48% -51%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
4548 Points ∼91%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4914 Points ∼98% +8%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
5012 Points ∼100% +10%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4454 Points ∼89% -2%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
1550 Points ∼31% -66%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
2262 Points ∼45% -50%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3800 Points ∼76% -16%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3800 - 5012, n=12)
4668 Points ∼93% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 14786, n=57)
2534 Points ∼51% -44%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
3280 Points ∼74%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3754 Points ∼85% +14%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
4416 Points ∼100% +35%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
2840 Points ∼64% -13%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
2532 Points ∼57% -23%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3160 Points ∼72% -4%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3309 Points ∼75% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (1934 - 4535, n=12)
3783 Points ∼86% +15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 4635, n=378)
1959 Points ∼44% -40%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
6739 Points ∼95%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7076 Points ∼100% +5%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
7089 Points ∼100% +5%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7069 Points ∼100% +5%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
1612 Points ∼23% -76%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
2438 Points ∼34% -64%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5184 Points ∼73% -23%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (5184 - 7115, n=12)
6776 Points ∼96% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 8374, n=378)
1765 Points ∼25% -74%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
5440 Points ∼87%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5913 Points ∼95% +9%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
6249 Points ∼100% +15%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5311 Points ∼85% -2%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
1754 Points ∼28% -68%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
2568 Points ∼41% -53%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4604 Points ∼74% -15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3969 - 6312, n=12)
5721 Points ∼92% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 6875, n=379)
1637 Points ∼26% -70%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
3288 Points ∼70%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3788 Points ∼81% +15%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
4405 Points ∼94% +34%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4703 Points ∼100% +43%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
2495 Points ∼53% -24%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3025 Points ∼64% -8%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3293 Points ∼70% 0%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (2345 - 4703, n=11)
3910 Points ∼83% +19%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 4703, n=407)
1868 Points ∼40% -43%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
6730 Points ∼65%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10291 Points ∼100% +53%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
10302 Points ∼100% +53%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
10290 Points ∼100% +53%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
2537 Points ∼25% -62%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3635 Points ∼35% -46%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6358 Points ∼62% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (6358 - 10420, n=11)
9422 Points ∼91% +40%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=407)
2344 Points ∼23% -65%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
5460 Points ∼67%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7449 Points ∼91% +36%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
7940 Points ∼98% +45%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
8141 Points ∼100% +49%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
2528 Points ∼31% -54%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3479 Points ∼43% -36%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5268 Points ∼65% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (5268 - 8141, n=11)
7130 Points ∼88% +31%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10427, n=407)
1969 Points ∼24% -64%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
3724 Points ∼86%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3758 Points ∼87% +1%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
4093 Points ∼95% +10%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4320 Points ∼100% +16%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
2466 Points ∼57% -34%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3215 Points ∼74% -14%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3242 Points ∼75% -13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (2705 - 4320, n=12)
3797 Points ∼88% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (486 - 4492, n=458)
1866 Points ∼43% -50%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
6325 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6355 Points ∼100% 0%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
6336 Points ∼100% 0%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6336 Points ∼100% 0%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
1487 Points ∼23% -76%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
2244 Points ∼35% -65%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6040 Points ∼95% -5%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (5663 - 6362, n=12)
6245 Points ∼98% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 7150, n=458)
1455 Points ∼23% -77%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
5475 Points ∼96%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5509 Points ∼97% +1%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
5648 Points ∼99% +3%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5705 Points ∼100% +4%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
1631 Points ∼29% -70%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
2405 Points ∼42% -56%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5068 Points ∼89% -7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (4556 - 5734, n=12)
5443 Points ∼95% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 6319, n=459)
1400 Points ∼25% -74%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
3726 Points ∼84%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3614 Points ∼81% -3%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
4068 Points ∼91% +9%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4454 Points ∼100% +20%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
2489 Points ∼56% -33%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3211 Points ∼72% -14%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
3505 Points ∼79% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3505 - 4454, n=11)
3920 Points ∼88% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 4454, n=499)
1729 Points ∼39% -54%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
6325 Points ∼63%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9963 Points ∼100% +58%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
10008 Points ∼100% +58%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9973 Points ∼100% +58%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
2428 Points ∼24% -62%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3478 Points ∼35% -45%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
6122 Points ∼61% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (6122 - 10008, n=11)
9197 Points ∼92% +45%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 11302, n=498)
1894 Points ∼19% -70%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
5478 Points ∼70%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7166 Points ∼92% +31%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
7556 Points ∼97% +38%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7820 Points ∼100% +43%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
2441 Points ∼31% -55%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3415 Points ∼44% -38%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5251 Points ∼67% -4%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (5251 - 7820, n=11)
7067 Points ∼90% +29%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 8136, n=501)
1638 Points ∼21% -70%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
27278 Points ∼81%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
25339 Points ∼75% -7%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
33697 Points ∼100% +24%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
14631 Points ∼43% -46%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
19389 Points ∼58% -29%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
30972 Points ∼92% +14%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (23877 - 45072, n=11)
31364 Points ∼93% +15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 45072, n=660)
14068 Points ∼42% -48%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
103955 Points ∼98%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
106534 Points ∼100% +2%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
Points ∼0% -100%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
35596 Points ∼33% -66%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
51091 Points ∼48% -51%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
97354 Points ∼91% -6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (97354 - 110432, n=10)
105749 Points ∼99% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209204, n=658)
21690 Points ∼20% -79%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
63969 Points ∼94%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
62225 Points ∼91% -3%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
Points ∼0% -100%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
26999 Points ∼40% -58%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
37475 Points ∼55% -41%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
65945 Points ∼96% +3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (60279 - 83518, n=10)
68338 Points ∼100% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 97276, n=658)
17606 Points ∼26% -72%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
167 fps ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
167 fps ∼100% 0%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
167 fps ∼100% 0%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
167 fps ∼100% 0%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
58 fps ∼35% -65%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
84 fps ∼50% -50%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
85 fps ∼51% -49%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (85 - 167, n=13)
156 fps ∼93% -7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=681)
37.6 fps ∼23% -77%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
69 fps ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
60 fps ∼87% -13%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
60 fps ∼87% -13%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
60 fps ∼87% -13%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
53 fps ∼77% -23%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
59 fps ∼86% -14%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
60 fps ∼87% -13%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (59 - 91, n=13)
63.1 fps ∼91% -9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=690)
27.9 fps ∼40% -60%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
90 fps ∼90%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
100 fps ∼100% +11%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
100 fps ∼100% +11%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
97 fps ∼97% +8%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
29 fps ∼29% -68%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
42 fps ∼42% -53%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
50 fps ∼50% -44%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (50 - 102, n=13)
94.6 fps ∼95% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=587)
21.6 fps ∼22% -76%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
59 fps ∼98%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
60 fps ∼100% +2%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
60 fps ∼100% +2%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
60 fps ∼100% +2%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
28 fps ∼46% -53%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
36 fps ∼60% -39%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
51 fps ∼85% -14%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (51 - 85, n=13)
60.3 fps ∼100% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=596)
19.2 fps ∼32% -67%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
62 fps ∼90%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
69 fps ∼100% +11%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
67 fps ∼97% +8%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
69 fps ∼100% +11%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
20 fps ∼29% -68%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
30 fps ∼43% -52%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
35 fps ∼51% -44%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (35 - 71, n=13)
62.5 fps ∼91% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=453)
17.7 fps ∼26% -71%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
51 fps ∼88%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
58 fps ∼100% +14%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
57 fps ∼98% +12%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
57 fps ∼98% +12%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
19 fps ∼33% -63%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
26 fps ∼45% -49%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
36 fps ∼62% -29%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (36 - 58, n=13)
48.9 fps ∼84% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=455)
16.6 fps ∼29% -67%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
17 fps ∼65%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
24 fps ∼92% +41%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
26 fps ∼100% +53%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
24 fps ∼92% +41%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
7.2 fps ∼28% -58%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
10 fps ∼38% -41%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
14 fps ∼54% -18%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (14 - 26, n=12)
21.4 fps ∼82% +26%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=171)
10.2 fps ∼39% -40%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
24 fps ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
16 fps ∼67% -33%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
17 fps ∼71% -29%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
16 fps ∼67% -33%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
4.5 fps ∼19% -81%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
6.8 fps ∼28% -72%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
8.5 fps ∼35% -65%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (8.5 - 24, n=13)
16.9 fps ∼70% -30%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 33, n=170)
7.08 fps ∼30% -70%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
36 fps ∼95%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
37 fps ∼97% +3%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
38 fps ∼100% +6%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
36 fps ∼95% 0%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
11 fps ∼29% -69%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
16 fps ∼42% -56%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
22 fps ∼58% -39%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (22 - 38, n=12)
34 fps ∼89% -6%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=175)
14.9 fps ∼39% -59%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
42 fps ∼98%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
41 fps ∼95% -2%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
43 fps ∼100% +2%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
42 fps ∼98% 0%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
12 fps ∼28% -71%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
18 fps ∼42% -57%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
22 fps ∼51% -48%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (22 - 43, n=13)
40.4 fps ∼94% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 87, n=175)
16.7 fps ∼39% -60%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
36 fps ∼86%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
42 fps ∼100% +17%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
42 fps ∼100% +17%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
42 fps ∼100% +17%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
11 fps ∼26% -69%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
17 fps ∼40% -53%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
22 fps ∼52% -39%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (22 - 42, n=13)
39.9 fps ∼95% +11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=378)
12.1 fps ∼29% -66%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
41 fps ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
38 fps ∼93% -7%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
37 fps ∼90% -10%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
36 fps ∼88% -12%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
11 fps ∼27% -73%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
15 fps ∼37% -63%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
21 fps ∼51% -49%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (21 - 41, n=13)
32.8 fps ∼80% -20%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=382)
10.9 fps ∼27% -73%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
372734 Points ∼93%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
374820 Points ∼94% +1%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
370908 Points ∼93% 0%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
398720 Points ∼100% +7%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
158868 Points ∼40% -57%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
202586 Points ∼51% -46%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
321145 Points ∼81% -14%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (217967 - 398720, n=13)
354658 Points ∼89% -5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (17073 - 462516, n=289)
141941 Points ∼36% -62%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
1076 Points ∼76%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
1378 Points ∼98% +28%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
1407 Points ∼100% +31%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
1321 Points ∼94% +23%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
1186 Points ∼84% +10%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
1117 Points ∼79% +4%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
1171 Points ∼83% +9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (1076 - 1431, n=12)
1321 Points ∼94% +23%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=625)
755 Points ∼54% -30%
Graphics (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
8700 Points ∼92%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9270 Points ∼98% +7%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
9477 Points ∼100% +9%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9416 Points ∼99% +8%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
2815 Points ∼30% -68%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3855 Points ∼41% -56%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
8414 Points ∼89% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (8125 - 9510, n=12)
9142 Points ∼96% +5%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=625)
2037 Points ∼21% -77%
Memory (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
3922 Points ∼52%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4031 Points ∼54% +3%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
5610 Points ∼75% +43%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
7500 Points ∼100% +91%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
3316 Points ∼44% -15%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3435 Points ∼46% -12%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4324 Points ∼58% +10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (2661 - 7500, n=12)
4973 Points ∼66% +27%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 7500, n=625)
1504 Points ∼20% -62%
System (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
7423 Points ∼82%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
8441 Points ∼93% +14%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
8986 Points ∼99% +21%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
9094 Points ∼100% +23%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
5507 Points ∼61% -26%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
6484 Points ∼71% -13%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
8718 Points ∼96% +17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (5993 - 9143, n=12)
8509 Points ∼94% +15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=625)
2952 Points ∼32% -60%
Overall (sort by value)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
4045 Points ∼75%
Xiaomi Mi 9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4595 Points ∼85% +14%
OnePlus 7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 8192
5089 Points ∼94% +26%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
5397 Points ∼100% +33%
Google Pixel 3a XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670, Adreno 616, 4096
2794 Points ∼52% -31%
Samsung Galaxy A80
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730, Adreno 618, 8192
3129 Points ∼58% -23%
LG G8s ThinQ
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855, Adreno 640, 6144
4389 Points ∼81% +9%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
  (3847 - 5397, n=12)
4726 Points ∼88% +17%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6097, n=625)
1480 Points ∼27% -63%
Jetstream 2 - Total Score
OnePlus 7 (Chrome 74)
63.057 Points ∼100% +7%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL (Chrome 75)
59.651 Points ∼95% +2%
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro (Chrome 75)
58.746 Points ∼93%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73)
57.207 Points ∼91% -3%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (45.5 - 63.1, n=11)
56.8 Points ∼90% -3%
LG G8s ThinQ (Chrome 75)
53.783 Points ∼85% -8%
Samsung Galaxy A80 (Chrome 75)
40.021 Points ∼63% -32%
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 133, n=100)
35.5 Points ∼56% -40%
Google Pixel 3a XL (Chrome 73)
32.083 Points ∼51% -45%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
OnePlus 7 (Chome 74)
67.9 runs/min ∼100% +60%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL (Chrome 75)
66.7 runs/min ∼98% +57%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)
65.7 runs/min ∼97% +55%
LG G8s ThinQ (Chome 75)
64.1 runs/min ∼94% +51%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (42.5 - 67.9, n=10)
60.7 runs/min ∼89% +43%
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro (Chrome 75)
42.5 runs/min ∼63%
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 157, n=89)
39.6 runs/min ∼58% -7%
Samsung Galaxy A80 (Chome 75)
38.9 runs/min ∼57% -8%
Google Pixel 3a XL (Chrome 73)
32.5 runs/min ∼48% -24%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
OnePlus 7 (Chrome 74)
110 Points ∼100% +3%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)
108 Points ∼98% +1%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL (Chrome 75)
108 Points ∼98% +1%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (94 - 129, n=13)
108 Points ∼98% +1%
LG G8s ThinQ (Chrome 75)
107 Points ∼97% 0%
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro (Chrome 75)
107 Points ∼97%
Samsung Galaxy A80 (Chrome 75)
77 Points ∼70% -28%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=156)
67.2 Points ∼61% -37%
Google Pixel 3a XL (Chrome 73)
62 Points ∼56% -42%
Octane V2 - Total Score
OnePlus 7 (Chrome 74)
25051 Points ∼100% +22%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)
24534 Points ∼98% +19%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL (Chrome 75)
24313 Points ∼97% +18%
LG G8s ThinQ (Chrome 75)
23830 Points ∼95% +16%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (17011 - 25640, n=13)
23006 Points ∼92% +12%
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro (Chrome 75)
20598 Points ∼82%
Samsung Galaxy A80 (Chrome 75)
16358 Points ∼65% -21%
Google Pixel 3a XL (Chrome 73)
11056 Points ∼44% -46%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=683)
6705 Points ∼27% -67%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (571 - 59466, n=708)
10599 ms * ∼100% -354%
Google Pixel 3a XL (Chrome 73)
3360.7 ms * ∼32% -44%
Samsung Galaxy A80 (Chrome 75)
3027 ms * ∼29% -30%
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro (Chrome 75)
2333.5 ms * ∼22%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 (1852 - 2611, n=12)
2130 ms * ∼20% +9%
LG G8s ThinQ (Chrome 75)
2036 ms * ∼19% +13%
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL (Chrome 75)
2029.5 ms * ∼19% +13%
OnePlus 7 (Chrome 74)
1958 ms * ∼18% +16%
Xiaomi Mi 9 (Chrome 73.0.3683.75)
1873.2 ms * ∼18% +20%

* ... smaller is better

Xiaomi Mi 9T ProXiaomi Mi 9OnePlus 7Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KLGoogle Pixel 3a XLSamsung Galaxy A80LG G8s ThinQAverage 128 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
24%
31%
5%
-37%
-36%
-23%
-12%
-68%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
62.51 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
46.7 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
61.5 (27.8 - 72.4, n=17)
49.1 (1.7 - 87.1, n=417)
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
87.04 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
67.53 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
77 (31.3 - 88.2, n=17)
67.3 (8.1 - 96.5, n=417)
Random Write 4KB
148.51
165.32
11%
28.7
-81%
160.18
8%
86.96
-41%
21.6
-85%
29.6
-80%
86.8 (18.2 - 250, n=39)
-42%
21.5 (0.14 - 250, n=733)
-86%
Random Read 4KB
142.5
149.36
5%
175.3
23%
153.29
8%
92.12
-35%
117.5
-18%
138
-3%
139 (98.9 - 158, n=39)
-2%
46.5 (1.59 - 196, n=733)
-67%
Sequential Write 256KB
196.87
388.27
97%
392
99%
195.6
-1%
179.09
-9%
190.4
-3%
182.4
-7%
205 (182 - 503, n=39)
4%
95.4 (2.99 - 590, n=733)
-52%
Sequential Read 256KB
808.76
666.06
-18%
1463
81%
831.4
3%
315.6
-61%
501.5
-38%
791.1
-2%
751 (427 - 912, n=39)
-7%
269 (12.1 - 1504, n=733)
-67%
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro - GFXBench
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro - GFXBench
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro - GFXBench
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro - GFXBench
Carga Máxima
 42.1 °C38.1 °C34.6 °C 
 40.3 °C37.9 °C34.9 °C 
 38.6 °C37.1 °C34.7 °C 
Máximo: 42.1 °C
Médio: 37.6 °C
33.6 °C37.6 °C41.7 °C
34 °C37.1 °C40.3 °C
33.7 °C37.1 °C37.3 °C
Máximo: 41.7 °C
Médio: 36.9 °C
alimentação elétrica  35.2 °C | Temperatura do quarto 21.9 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 37.6 °C / 100 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 42.1 °C / 108 F, compared to the average of 35.5 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 41.7 °C / 107 F, compared to the average of 34.1 °C / 93 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 32.8 °C / 91 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2043.947.32543.642.63138.339.74038.339.45041.242.46334.135802729.710028.631.812527.932.716026.145.820025.150.62502253.331520.55740020.561.150020.665.663018.668.580018.171.2100018.577.8125017.975.5160018.676.8200017.877.3250017.577.6315016.976.2400016.868.650001769.563001775.6800017.280.91000017.179.61250017.162.11600017.347.8SPL78.865.174.766.430.387.9N42.119.134.418.71.472.9median 18.1median 68.6Delta2.712.239.432.928.325.418.726.526.725.933.229.422.622.721.822.224.43123.839.218.550.417.149.117.853.815.556.114.162.51467.913.869.114.773.515.47715.276.614.376.514.574.913.971.714.675.914.178.114.374.314.574.614.875.714.87514.864.41558.226.887.10.871.4median 14.8median 71.71.510hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseXiaomi Mi 9T ProXiaomi Mi 9
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.8% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.8% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 34% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 55% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 58% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 34% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

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, 7% similar, 66% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 0 / 0.1 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 0.7 / 1 / 1.3 Watt
Carga midlight 5.2 / 10 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 9
3300 mAh
OnePlus 7
3700 mAh
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
5000 mAh
Google Pixel 3a XL
3700 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A80
3700 mAh
LG G8s ThinQ
3550 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
3%
-1%
-44%
2%
4%
-36%
-23%
-18%
Idle Minimum *
0.7
0.67
4%
0.6
14%
0.81
-16%
0.7
-0%
0.6
14%
1.2
-71%
0.956 (0.6 - 1.96, n=13)
-37%
0.877 (0.2 - 3.4, n=769)
-25%
Idle Average *
1
1.26
-26%
1.1
-10%
2.35
-135%
1.63
-63%
1.2
-20%
1.6
-60%
1.554 (0.85 - 2.8, n=13)
-55%
1.734 (0.6 - 6.2, n=768)
-73%
Idle Maximum *
1.3
1.29
1%
2
-54%
2.37
-82%
1.67
-28%
1.4
-8%
2
-54%
1.881 (1 - 2.9, n=13)
-45%
2.02 (0.74 - 6.6, n=769)
-55%
Load Average *
5.2
3.71
29%
4
23%
5.33
-3%
2.64
49%
5
4%
5
4%
4.65 (3.64 - 5.8, n=13)
11%
4.07 (0.8 - 10.8, n=763)
22%
Load Maximum *
10
9.3
7%
8
20%
8.55
14%
4.62
54%
7.1
29%
10
-0%
9.12 (7.49 - 11.9, n=13)
9%
5.9 (1.2 - 14.2, n=763)
41%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria
Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)
29h 28min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
12h 42min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
16h 27min
Carga (máximo brilho)
4h 9min
Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 9
3300 mAh
OnePlus 7
3700 mAh
Asus ZenFone 6 ZS630KL
5000 mAh
Google Pixel 3a XL
3700 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A80
3700 mAh
LG G8s ThinQ
3550 mAh
Battery Runtime
-14%
10%
52%
2%
-8%
-14%
Reader / Idle
1768
1650
-7%
1989
13%
2114
20%
1822
3%
1796
2%
1689
-4%
H.264
987
1008
2%
933
-5%
2138
117%
960
-3%
902
-9%
753
-24%
WiFi v1.3
762
546
-28%
901
18%
801
5%
709
-7%
713
-6%
693
-9%
Load
249
194
-22%
278
12%
409
64%
289
16%
200
-20%
203
-18%

Pro

+ Design sem bordas
+ GPS preciso
+ Painel OLED decente
+ Conector de 3,5 mm
+ Boas câmeras
+ Bom desempenho do sistema
+ Veloz sensor de digitais na tela

Contra

- Certificação Widevine L3 (Redmi K20 Pro) apenas
- Wi-Fi lento
- Cobertura LTE pobre (Redmi K20 Pro)
- Baixo brilho máximo manual
- Carregador de 27 W não incluído na caixa
The Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro) smartphone review. Test device courtesy of TradingShenzhen.
The Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro) smartphone review. Test device courtesy of TradingShenzhen.

O Mi 9T Pro, ou o Redmi K20 Pro, dependendo de onde você mora, é outro smartphone poderoso e acessível da Xiaomi. Se a empresa lançar o Mi 9T Pro mundialmente em breve por cerca de 400 Euros (~US$ 444) como varejistas de terceiros estão cobrando pelo Redmi K20 Pro, então recomendaríamos que você considere se está procurando por um Smartphone de menos de US$500.

Um dos maiores destaques do dispositivo é o seu belo painel AMOLED, que quase não possui marcos graças à sua câmera frontal retrátil. O Snapdragon 855 e 8 GB de RAM também estão disponíveis para oferecer excelente desempenho, enquanto os 128 GB de armazenamento são alguns dos UFS 2.1 mais rápidos do mercado. Também gostamos de que a Xiaomi também tenha um scanner óptico de digitais na tela, pois faz com que o dispositivo se sinta mais preparado para o futuro do que muitos de seus contemporâneos.

No entanto, o Mi 9T Pro tem suas desvantagens, embora um modelo mundial possa corrigir alguns dos problemas que temos com o dispositivo. A cobertura LTE limitada e a certificação Widevine L3 não devem afetar o modelo mundial, mas o alto-falante mono, a falta de armazenamento expansível, o carregamento sem fio e a certificação IP não nos incomodam. Da mesma forma, duvidamos que o modelo mundial aborde o afogamento do SoC, enquanto o MIUI é uma questão de gosto.

O Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro, mais conhecido como Redmi K20 Pro em algumas regiões, é um ótimo polivalente, mas não possui o polimento do Mi 9.

Certamente, a câmera selfie pop-up motorizada e o design sem ranhuras ajudam a distinguir o Mi 9T Pro de seus concorrentes, mas parece que a Xiaomi não é capaz de comercializar o dispositivo da série Mi 9. Enquanto o Mi 9T Pro custa tanto quanto o Mi 9, seu módulo Wi-Fi mais lento, alto-falante mono, armazenamento flash mais lento, pior calibração de tela e pior gerenciamento de temperatura fazem com que seja uma venda mais difícil do que o seu homônimo. O anterior tem uma bateria maior, melhor duração da bateria e um fone de ouvido de 3,5 mm, o que poderia fazer pender a balança em favor do Mi 9T Pro para algumas pessoas.

Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro - 07/30/2019 v6(old)
Marcus Herbrich

Acabamento
85%
Teclado
66 / 75 → 88%
Mouse
91%
Conectividade
47 / 60 → 78%
Peso
89%
Bateria
96%
Pantalha
95%
Desempenho do jogos
70 / 63 → 100%
Desempenho da aplicação
80 / 70 → 100%
Temperatura
88%
Ruído
100%
Audio
72 / 91 → 79%
Camera
79%
Médio
81%
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 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro): Não é outro Mi 9 com uma câmera pop-up
Marcus Herbrich, 2019-08- 5 (Update: 2019-08- 7)