Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarBreve Análise do Smartphone Xiaomi Redmi 7A – o telefone com preço reduzido
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Motorola Moto E5 Play | |
| Xiaomi Redmi 6A | |
| Huawei Y5 2019 | |
| Xiaomi Redmi 7A | |
| Nokia 2.1 | |
| Honor 7A | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Average of class Smartphone (last 2 years) | |
| Huawei Y5 2019 | |
| Xiaomi Redmi 7A | |
| Xiaomi Redmi 6A | |
| Motorola Moto E5 Play | |
| Nokia 2.1 | |
| Honor 7A | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 88 %
iluminação com acumulador: 533 cd/m²
Contraste: 888:1 (Preto: 0.6 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.6 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 7.4 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
94.2% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.212
| Xiaomi Redmi 7A IPS, 1440x720, 5.45 | Xiaomi Redmi 6A IPS, 1440x720, 5.45 | Honor 7A IPS, 1440x720, 5.70 | Nokia 2.1 IPS, 1280x720, 5.50 | Motorola Moto E5 Play IPS, 960x480, 5.20 | Huawei Y5 2019 IPS, 1520x720, 5.71 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 21% | 25% | 6% | -28% | 6% | |
| Brightness middle | 533 | 404 -24% | 417 -22% | 338 -37% | 369 -31% | 630 18% |
| Brightness | 506 | 400 -21% | 395 -22% | 327 -35% | 358 -29% | 593 17% |
| Brightness Distribution | 88 | 82 -7% | 88 0% | 82 -7% | 81 -8% | 88 0% |
| Black Level * | 0.6 | 0.26 57% | 0.18 70% | 0.27 55% | 0.4 33% | 0.66 -10% |
| Contrast | 888 | 1554 75% | 2317 161% | 1252 41% | 923 4% | 955 8% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5.6 | 4.28 24% | 6.46 -15% | 5.36 4% | 9.75 -74% | 5.79 -3% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 11.4 | 9.97 13% | 10.72 6% | 9.77 14% | 18.28 -60% | 9.54 16% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 7.4 | 3.5 53% | 5.8 22% | 6.2 16% | 11.8 -59% | 7 5% |
| Gamma | 2.212 99% | 2.213 99% | 2.423 91% | 2.345 94% | 2.057 107% | 2.176 101% |
| CCT | 7974 82% | 6899 94% | 7839 83% | 8460 77% | 11971 54% | 8420 77% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 78.6 |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 384.6 Hz | ≤ 10 % brightness setting |  |
The display backlight flickers at 384.6 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 10 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 384.6 Hz is relatively high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. However, there are reports that some users are still sensitive to PWM at 500 Hz and above, so be aware. 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
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 22 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 11 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 11 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 42 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (21.5 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 32 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 15 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 17 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 36 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (33.7 ms). | ||
| GFXBench 3.1 | |
| on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value) | |
| Xiaomi Redmi 7A | |
| Xiaomi Redmi 6A | |
| Honor 7A | |
| Nokia 2.1 | |
| Motorola Moto E5 Play | |
| Huawei Y5 2019 | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439 (6 - 14, n=6) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (3.7 - 158, n=185, last 2 years) | |
| 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value) | |
| Xiaomi Redmi 7A | |
| Xiaomi Redmi 6A | |
| Honor 7A | |
| Nokia 2.1 | |
| Motorola Moto E5 Play | |
| Huawei Y5 2019 | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439 (6.4 - 6.6, n=6) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (6.2 - 279, n=185, last 2 years) | |
| AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (sort by value) | |
| Xiaomi Redmi 7A | |
| Xiaomi Redmi 6A | |
| Honor 7A | |
| Motorola Moto E5 Play | |
| Huawei Y5 2019 | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439 (75175 - 79792, n=3) | |
| Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 351, n=173, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Redmi 7A (Chrome 76) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439 (15.9 - 16.9, n=5) | |
| Huawei Y5 2019 (Chrome 74) | |
| Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
| Average of class Smartphone (14.9 - 445, n=157, last 2 years) | |
| Xiaomi Redmi 7A (Chome 76) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439 (17.4 - 18.5, n=5) | |
| Huawei Y5 2019 (Chome 74) | |
| WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
| Average of class Smartphone (39 - 304, n=122, last 2 years) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439 (32 - 38, n=6) | |
| Huawei Y5 2019 (Chrome 74) | |
| Xiaomi Redmi 7A (Chrome 76) | |
| Xiaomi Redmi 6A (Chrome 70) | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Smartphone (4633 - 89112, n=211, last 2 years) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439 (4512 - 4958, n=6) | |
| Xiaomi Redmi 7A (Chrome 76) | |
| Huawei Y5 2019 (Chrome 74) | |
| Xiaomi Redmi 6A (Chrome 70) | |
| Honor 7A (Chrome 67) | |
| Nokia 2.1 (Chrome 70) | |
| Motorola Moto E5 Play | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Honor 7A (Chrome 67) | |
| Nokia 2.1 (Chrome 70) | |
| Motorola Moto E5 Play | |
| Xiaomi Redmi 6A (Chrome 70) | |
| Huawei Y5 2019 (Chrome 74) | |
| Xiaomi Redmi 7A (Chrome 76) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439 (9768 - 10143, n=6) | |
| Average of class Smartphone (388 - 9999, n=173, last 2 years) | |
* ... smaller is better
| Xiaomi Redmi 7A | Xiaomi Redmi 6A | Honor 7A | Nokia 2.1 | Motorola Moto E5 Play | Huawei Y5 2019 | Average 16 GB eMMC Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | 84% | -5% | 1% | 43% | 1% | -37% | 1263% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 258 | 277.5 8% | 254.8 -1% | 288.3 12% | 279 8% | 272.1 5% | 164.5 ? -36% | 1505 ? 483% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 68.7 | 131.7 92% | 72.5 6% | 51.2 -25% | 52.2 -24% | 45.2 -34% | 43 ? -37% | 1112 ? 1519% |
| Random Read 4KB | 57.8 | 33.94 -41% | 39.2 -32% | 50.5 -13% | 46.31 -20% | 62.1 7% | 21.7 ? -62% | 247 ? 327% |
| Random Write 4KB | 9.6 | 52.2 444% | 9.4 -2% | 13.45 40% | 43.16 350% | 13.1 36% | 8.08 ? -16% | 271 ? 2723% |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 85.2 ? | 82.8 ? -3% | 84.9 ? 0% | 79.4 ? -7% | 83.7 ? -2% | 81.8 ? -4% | 59.1 ? -31% | |
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 64.6 ? | 65.7 ? 2% | 65.4 ? 1% | 61.9 ? -4% | 28.83 ? -55% | 63.1 ? -2% | 39.8 ? -38% |
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 40.5 °C / 105 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 39.9 °C / 104 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °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 32.7 °C / 91 F.
Xiaomi Redmi 7A audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 67.5% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(-) | nearly no mids - on average 67.5% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(-) | nearly no highs - on average 67.5% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (0% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (126.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 95% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 1% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 99% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 0% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Xiaomi Redmi 6A audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (77.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 30.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.7% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (27.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 66% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 28% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 80% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 15% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado |   0.1 / 0.5 Watt |
| Ocioso |  0.8 / 1.6 / 2.2 Watt |
| Carga |
3.9 / 5.4 Watt |
    
| |
| Xiaomi Redmi 7A 4000 mAh | Xiaomi Redmi 6A 3000 mAh | Honor 7A 3000 mAh | Nokia 2.1 4000 mAh | Motorola Moto E5 Play 2120 mAh | Huawei Y5 2019 3020 mAh | Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 439 | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 17% | -22% | 16% | -3% | -10% | -10% | -15% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.8 | 0.7 12% | 1.3 -63% | 0.7 12% | 1.2 -50% | 1.2 -50% | 0.82 ? -3% | 0.897 ? -12% |
| Idle Average * | 1.6 | 1.2 25% | 1.6 -0% | 1.2 25% | 1.6 -0% | 1.9 -19% | 2.21 ? -38% | 1.452 ? 9% |
| Idle Maximum * | 2.2 | 2 9% | 2.9 -32% | 1.9 14% | 2 9% | 2.4 -9% | 2.49 ? -13% | 1.629 ? 26% |
| Load Average * | 3.9 | 3.4 13% | 3.7 5% | 3.2 18% | 3.6 8% | 3.3 15% | 3.78 ? 3% | 5.55 ? -42% |
| Load Maximum * | 5.4 | 4 26% | 6.4 -19% | 4.8 11% | 4.5 17% | 4.6 15% | 5.24 ? 3% | 8.31 ? -54% |
* ... smaller is better
| Xiaomi Redmi 7A 4000 mAh | Xiaomi Redmi 6A 3000 mAh | Honor 7A 3000 mAh | Nokia 2.1 4000 mAh | Motorola Moto E5 Play 2120 mAh | Huawei Y5 2019 3020 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -11% | -23% | -5% | -55% | -17% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1543 | 1256 -19% | ||||
| H.264 | 902 | 732 -19% | ||||
| WiFi v1.3 | 853 | 761 -11% | 657 -23% | 809 -5% | 382.9 -55% | 709 -17% |
| Load | 286 | 249 -13% |
Pro
Contra
Veredicto – Tão acessível e tão potente
Os telefones Redmi da Xiaomi são cortadores de preços - eles continuamente estabelecem novos padrões em sua faixa de preço: O Remi 7A está disponível por cerca de US$ 100 (dependendo da configuração) e oferece recursos que normalmente só vemos em smartphones que são o dobro do preço. Por exemplo, o telefone funciona com um Snapdragon 439, um SoC poderoso que oferece muito valor pelo seu dinheiro. A duração da bateria muito longa, os grandes alto-falantes e a adequação aos jogos completam o conjunto de excelentes recursos. A câmera tira fotos decentes, a tela é brilhante e o aquecimento é tolerável sob carga. As novas opções de cores dão ao telefone Xiaomi um visual moderno e fresco que também é muito confortável de segurar. Graças à função de carga rápida, o smartphone também recarrega rapidamente.
É uma coleção de pontos fortes para um dispositivo tão acessível e dificilmente qualquer concorrente nessa faixa de preço pode igualar-se a ele. O telefone inclusive supera o seu antecessor com uma maior duração da bateria e maior desempenho. O fato de os modelos Redmi A não estarem equipados com um leitor de digitais é uma vergonha, no entanto, assim como o GPS impreciso e o fone ligeiramente abafado.
Se você está procurando por um smartphone acessível e ainda quer um bom desempenho e uma bateria de longa duração, o Redmi 7A pode ser o telefone certo para você.
Podemos definitivamente recomendar o Xiaomi Redmi 7A. Apenas certifique-se de comprar a versão global de um revendedor confiável, pois você pode ter problemas com o adaptador de CA e a garantia.
Xiaomi Redmi 7A
-
08/08/2019 v6(old)
Florian Schmitt
Pricecompare
