Notebookcheck

Courte critique du smartphone Huawei Mate 20 X

Mike Wobker, 👁 Daniel Schmidt, Andrea Grüblinger (traduit par Prévots), 01/10/2019

De plus en plus gros... Après beaucoup de confusion, Huawei a annoncé qu’il lancerait le Mate 20 X en Autriche et en Allemagne - mais pas en France. Le smartphone géant de 7,2 pouces est finalement arrivé à Notebookcheck. Lisez ce rapport de test pour voir si ce smartphone à 900 € vaut le coup.

Huawei Mate 20 X (Mate 20 Gamme)
Processeur
HiSilicon Kirin 980
Carte graphique
ARM Mali-G76 MP10
Mémoire
6144 Mo 
Écran
7.2 pouces 18.7:9, 2244 x 1080 pixel 346 PPP, capacitif, OLED, brillant: oui
Disque dur
128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 128 Go 
, 110 Go libres
Connexions
1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 Infrarouge, Connectique audio: jack 3,5 mm, Lecteur de cartes mémoires: nano (jusqu'à 256 Go), 1 Lecteur d'empreintes digitales, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Capteurs: accéléromètre, baromètre, boussole, capteur de température des couleurs, capteur de gravité, gyroscope, magnétomètre, capteur de proximité
Réseau
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM : B2, B3, B5, B8; 850, 900, 1 800, 1 900 MHz. 3G/UMTS / TD-SCDMA : B34, B39. WCDMA: B1, B2, B4, B5, B6, B8, B19. LTE/FDD/TDD : B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, B6, B7, B8, B9, B12, B17, B18, B19, B20, B26, B34, B38, B39, B40., Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Taille
Hauteur x Largeur x Profondeur (en mm): 8.2 x 174.6 x 85.4
Batterie
5000 mAh Lithium-Polymère
Système d'exploitation
Android 9.0 Pie
Appareil photo
Appareil photo primaire: 40 MPix Leica triple capteur à l'arrière : 40 MP grand-angle, ouverture f1,8 ; 20 MP ultra-grand-angle, ouverture f/2,2 ; téléobjectif 8 MP, ouverture f/2,4, focus laser, focus à détectiond de phase, focus à détection de contraste, stabilisation d'image I
Appareil photo secondaire: 24 MPix f/2,0
Fonctionnalités additionnelles
Haut-parleurs: stéréos, Clavier: virtuel, Rétroéclairage du clavier: oui, chargeur USB, câble USB C, coque de protection, écouteurs, outil pour carte SIM, EMUI 9.0, 24 Mois Garantie, DAS - Tête : 0,42 W/kg, Corps : 0,95 W/kg, fanless
Poids
232 g, Alimentation: 97 g
Prix
900 euros
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Huawei Mate 20 X
Huawei Mate 20 X
Huawei Mate 20 X
Huawei Mate 20 X
Huawei Mate 20 X
Huawei Mate 20 X
Huawei Mate 20 X
Huawei Mate 20 X
Huawei Mate 20 X

Comparaison des tailles

200 mm 114 mm 8.65 mm 290 g192 mm 115 mm 9.6 mm 295 g176 mm 87.4 mm 8 mm 221 g174.6 mm 85.4 mm 8.2 mm 232 g162 mm 76.4 mm 8.8 mm 201 g158 mm 76.7 mm 7.9 mm 184 g156.9 mm 72.4 mm 8.6 mm 189 g157.5 mm 77.4 mm 7.7 mm 208 g
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Google Pixel 3 XL
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
635 (min: 315, max: 645) MBit/s ∼100% +12%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
A12 Bionic GPU, A12 Bionic, 64 GB eMMC Flash
624 MBit/s ∼98% +10%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
615 (min: 532, max: 642) MBit/s ∼97% +9%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
491 (min: 100, max: 534) MBit/s ∼77% -13%
Huawei Mate 20 X
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
566 (min: 514, max: 586) MBit/s ∼89%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
Mali-G72 MP18, 9810, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
485 MBit/s ∼76% -14%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
Adreno 509, 636, 64 GB eMMC Flash
344 (min: 326, max: 350) MBit/s ∼54% -39%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=348)
217 MBit/s ∼34% -62%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
696 (min: 647, max: 714) MBit/s ∼100% +10%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
663 (min: 289, max: 805) MBit/s ∼95% +5%
Huawei Mate 20 X
Mali-G76 MP10, Kirin 980, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
633 (min: 564, max: 663) MBit/s ∼91%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
A12 Bionic GPU, A12 Bionic, 64 GB eMMC Flash
602 MBit/s ∼86% -5%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
Mali-G72 MP18, 9810, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
485 MBit/s ∼70% -23%
Google Pixel 3 XL
Adreno 630, 845, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
456 (min: 429, max: 468) MBit/s ∼66% -28%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
Adreno 509, 636, 64 GB eMMC Flash
265 (min: 253, max: 270) MBit/s ∼38% -58%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=348)
209 MBit/s ∼30% -67%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø565 (514-586)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø633 (564-663)
GPS Huawei Mate 20 X : vue générale.
GPS Huawei Mate 20 X : vue générale.
GPS Huawei Mate 20 X : lac.
GPS Huawei Mate 20 X : lac.
GPS Huawei Mate 20 X : boucle.
GPS Huawei Mate 20 X : boucle.
GPS Garmin Edge 500 : vue générale.
GPS Garmin Edge 500 : vue générale.
GPS Garmin Edge 500 : lac.
GPS Garmin Edge 500 : lac.
GPS Garmin Edge 500 : boucle.
GPS Garmin Edge 500 : boucle.

Comparaison des images

Choisir une scène pour naviguer dans la première image. Un clic permet de changer le niveau de zoom, un autre clic permet de revenir à l'image originale dans une nouvelle fenêtre. La première image montre l'original pris par l'appareil testé.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
Cliquer pour charger les images
Huawei Mate 20 X - Mire de test.
Mire de test.
Huawei Mate 20 X - Mire de test zoomée.
416
cd/m²
424
cd/m²
422
cd/m²
409
cd/m²
421
cd/m²
415
cd/m²
414
cd/m²
422
cd/m²
416
cd/m²
Homogénéité de la luminosité
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 424 cd/m² Moyenne: 417.7 cd/m² Minimum: 1.78 cd/m²
Homogénéité de la luminosité: 96 %
Valeur mesurée au centre, sur batterie: 421 cd/m²
Contraste: ∞:1 (Valeurs des noirs: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.1 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2
ΔE Greyscale 1.4 | 0.64-98 Ø6.4
97.4% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.23
Huawei Mate 20 X
OLED, 2244x1080, 7.2
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
IPS, 2160x1080, 6.9
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
OLED, 3120x1440, 6.3
Google Pixel 3 XL
AMOLED, 2960x1440, 6.3
Apple iPhone Xs Max
OLED, 2688x1242, 6.5
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 6.4
Screen
-54%
-4%
-60%
1%
-122%
Brightness middle
421
508
21%
576
37%
410
-3%
656
56%
499
19%
Brightness
418
505
21%
582
39%
413
-1%
659
58%
506
21%
Brightness Distribution
96
91
-5%
90
-6%
97
1%
88
-8%
96
0%
Black Level *
0.28
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
1.1
2.85
-159%
1.3
-18%
3.16
-187%
1.7
-55%
4.62
-320%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
2.2
6.21
-182%
3.5
-59%
5.5
-150%
2.8
-27%
10.91
-396%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.4
1.7
-21%
1.6
-14%
1.7
-21%
1.7
-21%
2.2
-57%
Gamma
2.23 99%
2.226 99%
2.18 101%
2.219 99%
1.998 110%
2.103 105%
CCT
6723 97%
6860 95%
6561 99%
6653 98%
6487 100%
6115 106%
Contrast
1814

* ... Moindre est la valeur, meilleures sont les performances

Scintillement / MLI (Modulation de largeur d'impulsion)

Afin d'abaisser la luminosité de l'écran, certains ordinateurs portables font varier très rapidement le rétroéclairage entre éteint et allumé. La fréquence à laquelle le rétroéclairage s'éteint et se rallume est normalement fixée à une valeur qui permet de rendre la variation indétectable à l'œil nu? Si la fréquence est trop basse, certaines personnes peuvent être sujettes à une fatigue oculaire, des maux de tête ou même percevoir les variations.
Scintillement / MLI (Modulation de largeur d'impulsion) décelé 242.7 Hz ≤ 99 Niveau de luminosité

Le rétroéclairage de l'écran scintille à la fréquence de 242.7 Hz (certainement du fait de l'utilisation d'une MDI - Modulation de largeur d'impulsion) à un niveau de luminosité inférieur ou égal à 99 % . Aucun scintillement ne devrait être perceptible au-dessus de cette valeur.

La fréquence de rafraîchissement de 242.7 Hz est relativement faible, les personnes les plus sensibles devraient percevoir un scintillement et être sujettes à une fatigue oculaire accrue (avec le niveau de luminosité indiqué)

En comparaison, 52 % des appareils testés n'emploient pas MDI pour assombrir leur écran. Nous avons relevé une moyenne à 9868 (minimum : 43 - maximum : 142900) Hz dans le cas où une MDI était active.

Temps de réponse de l'écran

Le temps de réponse d'un écran mesure la rapidité à laquelle l'écran est capable de changer une couleur pour une autre. Un temps de réponse élevé se traduit par une image floutée pour les objets en mouvement. Les joueurs bénéficieront de faibles latences d'affichage en jeu.
       Temps de réponse noir à blanc
3.2 ms ... hausse ↗ et chute ↘ combinées↗ 1.2 ms hausse
↘ 2 ms chute
L'écran montre de très faibles temps de réponse, parfait pour le jeu.
En comparaison, tous les appareils testés affichent entre 0.8 (minimum) et 240 (maximum) ms. » 1 % des appareils testés affichent de meilleures performances.
Cela signifie que les latences relevées sont meilleures que la moyenne (25.5 ms) de tous les appareils testés.
       Temps de réponse gris 50% à gris 80%
3.6 ms ... hausse ↗ et chute ↘ combinées↗ 2 ms hausse
↘ 1.6 ms chute
L'écran montre de très faibles temps de réponse, parfait pour le jeu.
En comparaison, tous les appareils testés affichent entre 0.9 (minimum) et 636 (maximum) ms. » 0 % des appareils testés affichent de meilleures performances.
Cela signifie que les latences relevées sont meilleures que la moyenne (40.8 ms) de tous les appareils testés.
Geekbench 4.3
Compute RenderScript Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
5759 Points ∼53%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
4508 Points ∼41% -22%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
8938 Points ∼82% +55%
Google Pixel 3 XL
10876 Points ∼100% +89%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
9059 Points ∼83% +57%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (5759 - 9870, n=5)
8034 Points ∼74% +40%
Average of class Smartphone (1077 - 21070, n=238)
4591 Points ∼42% -20%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
9852 Points ∼88%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
4939 Points ∼44% -50%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
10024 Points ∼89% +2%
Google Pixel 3 XL
8292 Points ∼74% -16%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
11244 Points ∼100% +14%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
8874 Points ∼79% -10%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (9735 - 10024, n=5)
9889 Points ∼88% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (1634 - 11598, n=290)
4408 Points ∼39% -55%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
3234 Points ∼68%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
1335 Points ∼28% -59%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
3378 Points ∼71% +4%
Google Pixel 3 XL
2325 Points ∼49% -28%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
4774 Points ∼100% +48%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
1698 Points ∼36% -47%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (3234 - 3378, n=5)
3320 Points ∼70% +3%
Average of class Smartphone (590 - 4824, n=291)
1293 Points ∼27% -60%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
7772 Points ∼84%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
Points ∼0% -100%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
9225 Points ∼100% +19%
Google Pixel 3 XL
9029 Points ∼98% +16%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
5184 Points ∼56% -33%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (7567 - 9326, n=5)
8627 Points ∼94% +11%
Average of class Smartphone (2828 - 9868, n=301)
4744 Points ∼51% -39%
Work performance score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
9867 Points ∼79%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
6040 Points ∼48% -39%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
12535 Points ∼100% +27%
Google Pixel 3 XL
11180 Points ∼89% +13%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
5960 Points ∼48% -40%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (9728 - 13531, n=5)
11688 Points ∼93% +18%
Average of class Smartphone (3977 - 13531, n=469)
5176 Points ∼41% -48%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
2517 Points ∼58%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
2333 Points ∼53% -7%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4364 Points ∼100% +73%
Google Pixel 3 XL
3676 Points ∼84% +46%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
2723 Points ∼62% +8%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
2613 Points ∼60% +4%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (2371 - 4439, n=5)
3614 Points ∼83% +44%
Average of class Smartphone (939 - 4439, n=316)
1762 Points ∼40% -30%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
4103 Points ∼71%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
867 Points ∼15% -79%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4250 Points ∼73% +4%
Google Pixel 3 XL
5789 Points ∼100% +41%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
4828 Points ∼83% +18%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
3797 Points ∼66% -7%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (3718 - 4319, n=5)
4097 Points ∼71% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (138 - 8206, n=316)
1492 Points ∼26% -64%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
3599 Points ∼70%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
1008 Points ∼20% -72%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4275 Points ∼83% +19%
Google Pixel 3 XL
5133 Points ∼100% +43%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
4121 Points ∼80% +15%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
3450 Points ∼67% -4%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (3524 - 4315, n=5)
3912 Points ∼76% +9%
Average of class Smartphone (170 - 5200, n=319)
1393 Points ∼27% -61%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
2488 Points ∼56%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
2372 Points ∼54% -5%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4407 Points ∼100% +77%
Google Pixel 3 XL
3280 Points ∼74% +32%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
2961 Points ∼67% +19%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
2649 Points ∼60% +6%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (2421 - 4493, n=5)
3640 Points ∼83% +46%
Average of class Smartphone (375 - 4493, n=332)
1731 Points ∼39% -30%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
2536 Points ∼24%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
1402 Points ∼14% -45%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
5854 Points ∼56% +131%
Google Pixel 3 XL
8380 Points ∼81% +230%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
10374 Points ∼100% +309%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
4904 Points ∼47% +93%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (2536 - 5893, n=5)
4454 Points ∼43% +76%
Average of class Smartphone (131 - 14951, n=332)
2053 Points ∼20% -19%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
2525 Points ∼38%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
1542 Points ∼23% -39%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
5456 Points ∼82% +116%
Google Pixel 3 XL
6228 Points ∼93% +147%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
6667 Points ∼100% +164%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
4124 Points ∼62% +63%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (2525 - 5511, n=5)
4236 Points ∼64% +68%
Average of class Smartphone (159 - 7856, n=333)
1743 Points ∼26% -31%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
3751 Points ∼90%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
2355 Points ∼56% -37%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4183 Points ∼100% +12%
Google Pixel 3 XL
3605 Points ∼86% -4%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
3027 Points ∼72% -19%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
2569 Points ∼61% -32%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (3643 - 4216, n=5)
3994 Points ∼95% +6%
Average of class Smartphone (918 - 4216, n=392)
1695 Points ∼41% -55%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
3528 Points ∼69%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
815 Points ∼16% -77%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4206 Points ∼83% +19%
Google Pixel 3 XL
5089 Points ∼100% +44%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
3726 Points ∼73% +6%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
3673 Points ∼72% +4%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (3528 - 4256, n=5)
3958 Points ∼78% +12%
Average of class Smartphone (150 - 5246, n=394)
1222 Points ∼24% -65%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
3575 Points ∼77%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
954 Points ∼20% -73%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4201 Points ∼90% +18%
Google Pixel 3 XL
4662 Points ∼100% +30%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
3544 Points ∼76% -1%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
3353 Points ∼72% -6%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (3575 - 4238, n=5)
3966 Points ∼85% +11%
Average of class Smartphone (184 - 4734, n=402)
1171 Points ∼25% -67%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
3816 Points ∼92%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
1349 Points ∼33% -65%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4150 Points ∼100% +9%
Google Pixel 3 XL
3594 Points ∼87% -6%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
2713 Points ∼65% -29%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
2515 Points ∼61% -34%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (3756 - 4215, n=5)
4030 Points ∼97% +6%
Average of class Smartphone (512 - 4215, n=426)
1593 Points ∼38% -58%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
2347 Points ∼30%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
1335 Points ∼17% -43%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
5305 Points ∼68% +126%
Google Pixel 3 XL
7780 Points ∼100% +231%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
7055 Points ∼91% +201%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
4826 Points ∼62% +106%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (2347 - 5305, n=5)
4181 Points ∼54% +78%
Average of class Smartphone (43 - 8312, n=426)
1658 Points ∼21% -29%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
2567 Points ∼42%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
1477 Points ∼24% -42%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4996 Points ∼81% +95%
Google Pixel 3 XL
6180 Points ∼100% +141%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
5205 Points ∼84% +103%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
4008 Points ∼65% +56%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (2567 - 4996, n=5)
4089 Points ∼66% +59%
Average of class Smartphone (55 - 6454, n=434)
1423 Points ∼23% -45%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
19993 Points ∼54%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
17073 Points ∼46% -15%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
36755 Points ∼100% +84%
Google Pixel 3 XL
15614 Points ∼42% -22%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
27717 Points ∼75% +39%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
18756 Points ∼51% -6%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (19993 - 37164, n=5)
30139 Points ∼82% +51%
Average of class Smartphone (3958 - 37475, n=585)
13215 Points ∼36% -34%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
42579 Points ∼27%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
20836 Points ∼13% -51%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
67730 Points ∼42% +59%
Google Pixel 3 XL
53794 Points ∼34% +26%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
159735 Points ∼100% +275%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
36190 Points ∼23% -15%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (42128 - 67956, n=5)
57556 Points ∼36% +35%
Average of class Smartphone (1152 - 162695, n=585)
18721 Points ∼12% -56%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
34035 Points ∼44%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
19863 Points ∼26% -42%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
57047 Points ∼74% +68%
Google Pixel 3 XL
34855 Points ∼45% +2%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
77599 Points ∼100% +128%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
29994 Points ∼39% -12%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (34035 - 57073, n=5)
47844 Points ∼62% +41%
Average of class Smartphone (2915 - 77599, n=586)
15739 Points ∼20% -54%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
119 fps ∼53%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
36 fps ∼16% -70%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
120 fps ∼53% +1%
Google Pixel 3 XL
140 fps ∼62% +18%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
226 fps ∼100% +90%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
146 fps ∼65% +23%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (70 - 134, n=5)
112 fps ∼50% -6%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 251, n=609)
32.5 fps ∼14% -73%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
58 fps ∼95%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
34 fps ∼56% -41%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
61 fps ∼100% +5%
Google Pixel 3 XL
60 fps ∼98% +3%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
60 fps ∼98% +3%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
60 fps ∼98% +3%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (55 - 62, n=5)
59.2 fps ∼97% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (6.9 - 120, n=612)
25.9 fps ∼42% -55%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
78 fps ∼73%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
16 fps ∼15% -79%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
73 fps ∼68% -6%
Google Pixel 3 XL
56 fps ∼52% -28%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
107 fps ∼100% +37%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
76 fps ∼71% -3%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (48 - 87, n=5)
70.6 fps ∼66% -9%
Average of class Smartphone (2.2 - 132, n=530)
17.6 fps ∼16% -77%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
58 fps ∼98%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
15 (min: 16) fps ∼25% -74%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
42 fps ∼71% -28%
Google Pixel 3 XL
37 fps ∼63% -36%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
59 fps ∼100% +2%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
47 fps ∼80% -19%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (42 - 60, n=5)
55.4 fps ∼94% -4%
Average of class Smartphone (4.1 - 115, n=534)
16.7 fps ∼28% -71%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
53 fps ∼76%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
10 fps ∼14% -81%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
29 fps ∼42% -45%
Google Pixel 3 XL
45 fps ∼65% -15%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
69.3 fps ∼100% +31%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
45 fps ∼65% -15%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (29 - 55, n=5)
48 fps ∼69% -9%
Average of class Smartphone (2.6 - 88, n=391)
14.9 fps ∼22% -72%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
50 fps ∼85%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
9.8 fps ∼17% -80%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
26 fps ∼44% -48%
Google Pixel 3 XL
25 fps ∼42% -50%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
58.9 fps ∼100% +18%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
25 fps ∼42% -50%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (26 - 51, n=5)
44.4 fps ∼75% -11%
Average of class Smartphone (3.5 - 110, n=394)
14.3 fps ∼24% -71%
GFXBench
High Tier Onscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
20 fps ∼62%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
3.6 fps ∼11% -82%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
19 fps ∼59% -5%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
32.1 fps ∼100% +61%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (19 - 21, n=4)
20 fps ∼62% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (0.61 - 59, n=97)
9.25 fps ∼29% -54%
2560x1440 High Tier Offscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
13 fps ∼80%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
2.2 fps ∼13% -83%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
13 fps ∼80% 0%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
16.3 fps ∼100% +25%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (13 - 14, n=4)
13.3 fps ∼82% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (0.21 - 31, n=97)
6.32 fps ∼39% -51%
Normal Tier Onscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
29 fps ∼62%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
5.6 fps ∼12% -81%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
18 fps ∼38% -38%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
47 fps ∼100% +62%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (18 - 32, n=4)
27.5 fps ∼59% -5%
Average of class Smartphone (1.4 - 59, n=97)
13.8 fps ∼29% -52%
1920x1080 Normal Tier Offscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
30 fps ∼82%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
5.9 fps ∼16% -80%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
33 fps ∼90% +10%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
36.8 fps ∼100% +23%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (30 - 34, n=4)
32.8 fps ∼89% +9%
Average of class Smartphone (0.77 - 63, n=96)
15.1 fps ∼41% -50%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
28 fps ∼70%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
6.3 fps ∼16% -77%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
31 fps ∼78% +11%
Google Pixel 3 XL
33 fps ∼83% +18%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
40 fps ∼100% +43%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
28 fps ∼70% 0%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (28 - 32, n=5)
30.2 fps ∼76% +8%
Average of class Smartphone (9 - 54, n=321)
10.1 fps ∼25% -64%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
28 fps ∼90%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
6 fps ∼19% -79%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
16 fps ∼52% -43%
Google Pixel 3 XL
18 fps ∼58% -36%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
31 fps ∼100% +11%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
15 fps ∼48% -46%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (16 - 30, n=5)
25.6 fps ∼83% -9%
Average of class Smartphone (9.4 - 58, n=324)
9.12 fps ∼29% -67%
AnTuTu v7 - Total Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
273409 Points ∼90%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
118959 Points ∼39% -56%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
300617 Points ∼99% +10%
Google Pixel 3 XL
285269 Points ∼94% +4%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
302955 Points ∼100% +11%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
236552 Points ∼78% -13%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (268359 - 306296, n=5)
290229 Points ∼96% +6%
Average of class Smartphone (41483 - 348178, n=213)
121109 Points ∼40% -56%
AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
253082 Points ∼100%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
98170 Points ∼39% -61%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
250848 Points ∼99% -1%
Google Pixel 3 XL
215632 Points ∼85% -15%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
214090 Points ∼85% -15%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (250848 - 254229, n=5)
252881 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Smartphone (23275 - 273655, n=428)
79983 Points ∼32% -68%
BaseMark OS II
Web (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
1239 Points ∼72%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
1037 Points ∼60% -16%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
1424 Points ∼82% +15%
Google Pixel 3 XL
1176 Points ∼68% -5%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
1731 Points ∼100% +40%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
1132 Points ∼65% -9%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (1239 - 1430, n=5)
1351 Points ∼78% +9%
Average of class Smartphone (7 - 1731, n=542)
714 Points ∼41% -42%
Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
5070 Points ∼32%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
1608 Points ∼10% -68%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
6273 Points ∼40% +24%
Google Pixel 3 XL
7989 Points ∼51% +58%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
15659 Points ∼100% +209%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
6506 Points ∼42% +28%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (4963 - 7484, n=5)
5849 Points ∼37% +15%
Average of class Smartphone (18 - 15969, n=542)
1806 Points ∼12% -64%
Memory (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
5700 Points ∼91%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
2492 Points ∼40% -56%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
6283 Points ∼100% +10%
Google Pixel 3 XL
2825 Points ∼45% -50%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
1815 Points ∼29% -68%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
2068 Points ∼33% -64%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (5431 - 6283, n=5)
5792 Points ∼92% +2%
Average of class Smartphone (21 - 6283, n=542)
1328 Points ∼21% -77%
System (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
7923 Points ∼68%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
4320 Points ∼37% -45%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
8604 Points ∼74% +9%
Google Pixel 3 XL
4417 Points ∼38% -44%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
11675 Points ∼100% +47%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
6137 Points ∼53% -23%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (7789 - 8604, n=5)
8302 Points ∼71% +5%
Average of class Smartphone (369 - 12202, n=542)
2662 Points ∼23% -66%
Overall (Classer selon les valeurs)
Huawei Mate 20 X
4104 Points ∼84%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
2058 Points ∼42% -50%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4687 Points ∼96% +14%
Google Pixel 3 XL
3291 Points ∼67% -20%
Apple iPhone Xs Max
4895 Points ∼100% +19%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
3110 Points ∼64% -24%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (4014 - 4746, n=5)
4403 Points ∼90% +7%
Average of class Smartphone (150 - 6097, n=546)
1319 Points ∼27% -68%

Légende

 
Huawei Mate 20 X HiSilicon Kirin 980, ARM Mali-G76 MP10, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Xiaomi Mi Max 3 Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Qualcomm Adreno 509, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Huawei Mate 20 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 980, ARM Mali-G76 MP10, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Google Pixel 3 XL Qualcomm Snapdragon 845, Qualcomm Adreno 630, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Apple iPhone Xs Max Apple A12 Bionic, Apple A12 Bionic GPU, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 Samsung Exynos 9810, ARM Mali-G72 MP18, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12)
273.01 Points ∼100% +193%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
109.18 Points ∼40% +17%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (93.2 - 109, n=5)
104 Points ∼38% +12%
Huawei Mate 20 X (hrome 71)
93.241 Points ∼34%
Google Pixel 3 XL (Chrome 70)
75.8 Points ∼28% -19%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Chrome 68)
63.012 Points ∼23% -32%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3 (Chrome 69)
44.568 Points ∼16% -52%
Average of class Smartphone (10.8 - 273, n=467)
37.7 Points ∼14% -60%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12)
43114 Points ∼100% +103%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
23285 Points ∼54% +10%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (20975 - 23285, n=5)
21963 Points ∼51% +4%
Huawei Mate 20 X (hrome 71)
21208 Points ∼49%
Google Pixel 3 XL (Chrome 70)
16228 Points ∼38% -23%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Chrome 68)
14663 Points ∼34% -31%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3 (Chrome 69)
8273 Points ∼19% -61%
Average of class Smartphone (1506 - 43280, n=603)
5838 Points ∼14% -72%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (603 - 59466, n=622)
11167 ms * ∼100% -421%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3 (Chrome 69)
4578.1 ms * ∼41% -113%
Google Pixel 3 XL (Chrome 70)
2785 ms * ∼25% -30%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Chrome 68)
2710 ms * ∼24% -26%
Huawei Mate 20 X (hrome 71)
2145.4 ms * ∼19%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (1948 - 2145, n=5)
2015 ms * ∼18% +6%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
1951.9 ms * ∼17% +9%
Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12)
603.1 ms * ∼5% +72%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12)
155 Points ∼100% +80%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
124 Points ∼80% +44%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (86 - 124, n=5)
106 Points ∼68% +23%
Google Pixel 3 XL (Chrome 70)
100 Points ∼65% +16%
Huawei Mate 20 X (hrome 71)
86 Points ∼55%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Chrome 68)
72 Points ∼46% -16%
Average of class Smartphone (24 - 161, n=84)
64.3 Points ∼41% -25%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Apple iPhone Xs Max (Safari 12)
347 Points ∼100% +50%
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Chrome 69)
334 Points ∼96% +44%
Google Pixel 3 XL (Chrome 70)
287 Points ∼83% +24%
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980 (228 - 334, n=5)
277 Points ∼80% +19%
Huawei Mate 20 X (hrome 71)
232 Points ∼67%
Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Chrome 68)
202 Points ∼58% -13%
Xiaomi Mi Max 3 (Chrome 69)
148 Points ∼43% -36%
Average of class Smartphone (74 - 362, n=307)
117 Points ∼34% -50%

* ... Moindre est la valeur, meilleures sont les performances

Huawei Mate 20 XXiaomi Mi Max 3Huawei Mate 20 ProGoogle Pixel 3 XLSamsung Galaxy Note 9Average 128 GB UFS 2.1 FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
-33%
-4%
-17%
-20%
-14%
-58%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
72 (Huawei NanoSD 128 GB)
60.28 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-16%
72.38 (Huawei NanoSD 128 GB)
1%
66.7 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-7%
64.9 (51.3 - 72.4, n=9)
-10%
47 (19.2 - 87.1, n=355)
-35%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
83.14 (Huawei NanoSD 128 GB)
83.79 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
1%
83.18 (Huawei NanoSD 128 GB)
0%
77 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-7%
80.8 (73.7 - 85.4, n=9)
-3%
65.2 (29.8 - 96.5, n=355)
-22%
Random Write 4KB
237.63
87.08
-63%
157.84
-34%
132.7
-44%
21
-91%
93 (19.5 - 250, n=23)
-61%
17.7 (0.14 - 250, n=650)
-93%
Random Read 4KB
144.44
72.87
-50%
157.42
9%
120.8
-16%
134
-7%
140 (117 - 158, n=23)
-3%
41 (1.59 - 173, n=650)
-72%
Sequential Write 256KB
182.7
185.4
1%
196.39
7%
228.6
25%
196
7%
200 (183 - 212, n=23)
9%
85.5 (2.99 - 253, n=650)
-53%
Sequential Read 256KB
911.88
274.63
-70%
853.28
-6%
632.6
-31%
805
-12%
756 (427 - 912, n=23)
-17%
240 (12.1 - 912, n=650)
-74%

Arena of Valor

010203040506070Tooltip
; min: Ø60.2 (60-61)
; high HD: Ø60.2 (58-61)

Asphalt 9: Legends

010203040Tooltip
; High Quality: Ø29.9 (28-31)
; Standard / low: Ø29.9 (29-31)
 33.4 °C33.6 °C30.3 °C 
 32.4 °C32.4 °C30 °C 
 30.8 °C31.2 °C29.9 °C 
Maximum: 33.6 °C
Moyenne: 31.6 °C
27.7 °C28.5 °C34.7 °C
27.5 °C28.9 °C32.4 °C
27.9 °C28.9 °C30.3 °C
Maximum: 34.7 °C
Moyenne: 29.6 °C
Alimentation (valeur maximale)  32 °C | Température ambiante de la pièce 22 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 31.6 °C / 89 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 33.6 °C / 92 F, compared to the average of 35.6 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 34.7 °C / 94 F, compared to the average of 34.1 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.4 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 33.1 °C / 92 F.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2031.137.32529.230.4312622.34023.221.55031.931.36327.421.7802921.610024.224.812518.4341601851.820017.450.725014.456.131515.859.740016.360.850015.461.163014.763.580016.265.5100014.773125013.871.616001474.3200014.473.9250014.176.4315014.674.1400014.672.7500014.470.5630014.469.2800014.863.71000015.259.21250014.758.61600014.849.7SPL26.984.1N0.955.6median 14.7median 63.5Delta1.49.632.341.525.63125.733.227.429.23738.323.323.621.424.121.725.119.933.217.439.9174716.450.114.551.314.256.714.156.912.655.512.558.51259.911.860.911.662.411.463.911.358.811.456.111.159.711.25811.356.711.259.411.358.411.355.711.350.954.565.56767.167.365.824.171.69.618.919.520.221.617.80.629median 11.8median 56.71.74.5hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseHuawei Mate 20 XSamsung Galaxy Note 9
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Huawei Mate 20 X audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.7% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.1% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 10% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 84% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 39% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 54% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Samsung Galaxy Note 9 audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (71.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.6% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (13.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 0% of all tested devices in this class were better, 0% similar, 100% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 9% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 88% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Consommation énergétique
Éteint/en veilledarklight 0.01 / 0.25 Watts
Au reposdarkmidlight 0.79 / 1.72 / 1.83 Watts
Fortement sollicité midlight 5.53 / 9.85 Watts
 color bar
Légende: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Huawei Mate 20 X
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
5500 mAh
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4200 mAh
Google Pixel 3 XL
3430 mAh
Apple iPhone Xs Max
3174 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
4000 mAh
Average HiSilicon Kirin 980
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
14%
-2%
8%
10%
-20%
-3%
9%
Idle Minimum *
0.79
0.7
11%
0.95
-20%
0.7
11%
1
-27%
0.9
-14%
0.8 (0.6 - 0.97, n=5)
-1%
0.882 (0.2 - 3.4, n=681)
-12%
Idle Average *
1.72
1.5
13%
2.17
-26%
1.4
19%
1.4
19%
1.9
-10%
1.93 (0.9 - 2.58, n=5)
-12%
1.731 (0.6 - 6.2, n=680)
-1%
Idle Maximum *
1.83
2.2
-20%
2.25
-23%
2
-9%
1.7
7%
3.7
-102%
2.23 (1.83 - 2.63, n=5)
-22%
2.01 (0.74 - 6.6, n=681)
-10%
Load Average *
5.53
3.8
31%
4.47
19%
4.8
13%
4.6
17%
5.3
4%
5.35 (4.47 - 6.3, n=5)
3%
4.06 (0.8 - 10.8, n=675)
27%
Load Maximum *
9.85
6.5
34%
6.15
38%
9.5
4%
6.7
32%
7.6
23%
8.05 (6.15 - 9.85, n=5)
18%
5.82 (1.2 - 14.2, n=675)
41%

* ... Moindre est la valeur, meilleures sont les performances

Autonomie
Au repos (module WiFi éteint, luminosité au minimum)
33h 04min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
13h 06min
En lecture de Big Buck Bunny encodé en H.264 1080p
16h 26min
Fortement sollicité (luminosité au maximum)
5h 00min
Huawei Mate 20 X
5000 mAh
Xiaomi Mi Max 3
5500 mAh
Huawei Mate 20 Pro
4200 mAh
Google Pixel 3 XL
3430 mAh
Apple iPhone Xs Max
3174 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Note 9
4000 mAh
Autonomie de la batterie
66%
-8%
-13%
-21%
-1%
Reader / Idle
1984
1747
-12%
1725
-13%
1305
-34%
1687
-15%
H.264
986
854
-13%
724
-27%
801
-19%
896
-9%
WiFi v1.3
786
1305
66%
767
-2%
691
-12%
742
-6%
794
1%
Load
300
282
-6%
299
0%
223
-26%
354
18%

Points positifs

+ très grand écran
+ Wifi rapide
+ Bluetooth 5.0
+ bons appareils photo
+ double SIM LTE

Points négatifs

- carte mémoire nano
- scintillement MLI de l'écran
En test : le Huawei Mate 20 X. Modèle de test aimablement fourni par Huawei Allemagne.
En test : le Huawei Mate 20 X. Modèle de test aimablement fourni par Huawei Allemagne.

Le Huawei Mate 20 X possède les mêmes qualités que les autres Mate 20, que nous avons appréciés. Le smartphone géant possède d’excellentes performances globales et de stockage, tandis que ses appareils photo sont de premier ordre. De plus, l’écran OLED est impressionnant, tout comme les vitesses du LTE et du Wifi.

Le Mate 20 X n’a pas les fonctionnalités marquantes du Mate 20 Pro, comme sa reconnaissance faciale 3D, la charge sans fil ou son chargeur rapide 40 W, ce qui est décevant. La luminosité maximale de l’écran est également inférieure.

Le Huawei Mate 20 X est une excellente phablette flagship, dont les performances sont uniques pour cette taille.

Cela vaut le coût de garder à l’esprit que d’autres appareils obtiennent des résultats similaires dans nos tests, et prennent de presque aussi bonnes photos que le triple capteur intégré ici. Mais vous n’aurez pas de meilleure alternative si vous êtes en recherche d’une phablette porte-étandard.

L’intégralité de cette critique est disponible en anglais en suivant ce lien.

Huawei Mate 20 X - 01/10/2019 v6
Mike Wobker

Châssis
90%
Clavier
69 / 75 → 92%
Dispositif de pointage
96%
Connectivité
48 / 60 → 80%
Poids
88%
Autonomie
96%
Écran
90%
Performances en jeu
65 / 63 → 100%
Performances dans les applications
80 / 70 → 100%
Chauffe
94%
Nuisance sonore
100%
Audio
74 / 91 → 81%
Appareil photo
93%
Moyenne
83%
91%
Smartphone - Moyenne compensée

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Revues et rapports de ordinateurs portatifs et smartphones, ordiphones > Critiques > Courte critique du smartphone Huawei Mate 20 X
Mike Wobker, 2019-01-10 (Update: 2019-01-10)