Notebookcheck

Test du Nokia 6.2 : Android One avec une vraie double SIM et un emplacement SD

Marcus Herbrich, 👁 Daniel Schmidt (traduit par Prévots), 01/15/2020

Pour les puristes Android. Le Nokia 6.2 est un smartphone du milieu de gamme bon marché faisant partie du programme Android One, et qui ne possède pas de faiblesses majeures liées à son faible prix d’appel. Un concurrent Android lui rend cependant la vie rude, ce qui n’en fait une alternative intéressante que pour les puristes Android.

Nokia 6.2 (6 Gamme)
Carte graphique
Qualcomm Adreno 509
Mémoire
4096 Mo 
Écran
6.3 pouces 19.5:9, 2340 x 1080 pixel 409 PPP, capacitif, IPS, brillant: oui
Disque dur
64 GB eMMC Flash, 64 Go 
, , 48.6 Go libres
Connexions
1 USB 2.0, Connectique audio: jack 3,5 mm, Lecteur de cartes mémoires: micro SD jusqu'à 512 Go, 1 Lecteur d'empreintes digitales, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Capteurs: capteur de proximité, accéléromètre, E-boussole, gyroscope, USB C, USB OTG, LED de notification, Miracast, radio FM, emplacement triple
Réseau
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM : 850, 900, 1 800, 1 900; WCDMA: 1, 5, 8 | LTE : 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41 (120 MHz), Dual SIM, LTE, GPS
Taille
Hauteur x Largeur x Profondeur (en mm): 8.25 x 159.9 x 75.15
Batterie
3500 mAh Lithium-Polymère
Charging
fast charging / Quickcharge
Système d'exploitation
Android 9.0 Pie
Appareil photo
Appareil photo primaire: 16 MPix 16 MP (f/1,8, 27 mm, 1,0 µm) 8 MP (f/2,2, 13 mm) 5 MP
Appareil photo secondaire: 8 MPix f/2,0, 1 / 4", 1,12 µm
Fonctionnalités additionnelles
Haut-parleurs: mono, Clavier: virtuel, guide de démarrage rapide, câble USB C, chargeur 5V / 2A, écouteurs, outil pour carte SIM, Android One, 24 Mois Garantie, DAS (tête) : 0,976 W/kg, DAS (corps) : 1,42, Widevine L1, fanless
Poids
180 g, Alimentation: 62 g
Prix
199 euros
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Appareils du comparatif

NoteDateModèlePoidsDriveTailleRésolutionBest Price
78%01/20Nokia 6.2
636, Adreno 509
180 g64 GB eMMC Flash6.3"2340x1080
79%11/19Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
665, Adreno 610
190 g128 GB eMMC Flash6.3"2340x1080
81%11/19Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4
200 g128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash6.53"2340x1080
80%05/19Samsung Galaxy A50
Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3
166 g128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash6.4"2340x1080
78%05/19Huawei P30 Lite
Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4
159 g128 GB eMMC Flash6.15"2312x1080
88%05/19Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
712, Adreno 616
155 g128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash5.97"2340x1080
Nokia 6.2 Smartphone
Nokia 6.2 Smartphone

Comparaison des tailles

161.35 mm 76.4 mm 8.79 mm 200 g159.9 mm 75.15 mm 8.25 mm 180 g158.3 mm 75.3 mm 8.3 mm 190 g158.5 mm 74.7 mm 7.7 mm 166 g152.9 mm 72.7 mm 7.4 mm 159 g147.5 mm 70.5 mm 7.45 mm 155 g
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mali-G76 MP4, Helio G90T, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
353 (min: 330, max: 362) MBit/s ∼100% +9%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Adreno 610, 665, 128 GB eMMC Flash
339 (min: 320, max: 349) MBit/s ∼96% +4%
Nokia 6.2
Adreno 509, 636, 64 GB eMMC Flash
325 (min: 280, max: 342) MBit/s ∼92%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Adreno 616, 712, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
311 (min: 214, max: 346) MBit/s ∼88% -4%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Mali-G72 MP3, Exynos 9610, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
294 (min: 278, max: 302) MBit/s ∼83% -10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5.9 - 939, n=473)
230 MBit/s ∼65% -29%
Huawei P30 Lite
Mali-G51 MP4, Kirin 710, 128 GB eMMC Flash
188 (min: 45, max: 237) MBit/s ∼53% -42%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mali-G76 MP4, Helio G90T, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
319 (min: 302, max: 325) MBit/s ∼100% +12%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Adreno 610, 665, 128 GB eMMC Flash
303 (min: 242, max: 355) MBit/s ∼95% +7%
Nokia 6.2
Adreno 509, 636, 64 GB eMMC Flash
284 (min: 240, max: 307) MBit/s ∼89%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Adreno 616, 712, 128 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
279 (min: 229, max: 303) MBit/s ∼87% -2%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Mali-G72 MP3, Exynos 9610, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
272 (min: 250, max: 285) MBit/s ∼85% -4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (9.4 - 703, n=473)
219 MBit/s ∼69% -23%
Huawei P30 Lite
Mali-G51 MP4, Kirin 710, 128 GB eMMC Flash
218 (min: 95, max: 239) MBit/s ∼68% -23%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350Tooltip
; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø325 (280-342)
; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø284 (240-307)
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Garmin Edge 500
GPS Nokia 6.2
GPS Nokia 6.2
GPS Nokia 6.2
GPS Nokia 6.2
GPS Nokia 6.2
GPS Nokia 6.2

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
ColorChecker Photo
26.7 ∆E
52.2 ∆E
38.7 ∆E
40.2 ∆E
42.5 ∆E
67.9 ∆E
52.7 ∆E
33.4 ∆E
39 ∆E
23.9 ∆E
67.4 ∆E
64.5 ∆E
29.1 ∆E
52.1 ∆E
33 ∆E
77.2 ∆E
39.1 ∆E
47.9 ∆E
90.2 ∆E
70.1 ∆E
51.2 ∆E
36.2 ∆E
23.4 ∆E
13.4 ∆E
ColorChecker Nokia 6.2: 46.34 ∆E min: 13.36 - max: 90.21 ∆E
ColorChecker Photo
20.6 ∆E
8.9 ∆E
14 ∆E
19.6 ∆E
10.3 ∆E
5.1 ∆E
16.8 ∆E
13.1 ∆E
12.7 ∆E
6.2 ∆E
5.9 ∆E
12.8 ∆E
7 ∆E
10.5 ∆E
13.1 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
11.3 ∆E
10.2 ∆E
9.1 ∆E
1.9 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
10.2 ∆E
6.3 ∆E
2 ∆E
ColorChecker Nokia 6.2: 9.97 ∆E min: 1.86 - max: 20.57 ∆E
Nokia 6.2 Smartphone
Nokia 6.2 Smartphone
Nokia 6.2 Smartphone
Nokia 6.2 Smartphone
Nokia 6.2 Smartphone
553
cd/m²
604
cd/m²
607
cd/m²
556
cd/m²
611
cd/m²
597
cd/m²
560
cd/m²
588
cd/m²
565
cd/m²
Homogénéité de la luminosité
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 611 cd/m² Moyenne: 582.3 cd/m² Minimum: 5.74 cd/m²
Homogénéité de la luminosité: 91 %
Valeur mesurée au centre, sur batterie: 611 cd/m²
Contraste: 1528:1 (Valeurs des noirs: 0.4 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.2 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 6.1 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
100% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.21
Nokia 6.2
IPS, 2340x1080, 6.3
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
IPS, 2340x1080, 6.3
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
IPS, 2340x1080, 6.53
Samsung Galaxy A50
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.4
Huawei P30 Lite
IPS LCD, 2312x1080, 6.15
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
AMOLED, 2340x1080, 5.97
Screen
23%
4%
22%
7%
31%
Brightness middle
611
656
7%
669
9%
644
5%
451
-26%
583
-5%
Brightness
582
643
10%
630
8%
628
8%
430
-26%
577
-1%
Brightness Distribution
91
95
4%
87
-4%
91
0%
90
-1%
97
7%
Black Level *
0.4
0.54
-35%
0.42
-5%
0.55
-38%
Contrast
1528
1215
-20%
1593
4%
820
-46%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.2
1.1
79%
4.8
8%
2.64
49%
1.4
73%
1.6
69%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
10.2
2.4
76%
9
12%
9.23
10%
4.4
57%
3.9
62%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
6.1
2.2
64%
6.2
-2%
2.5
59%
2.5
59%
2.7
56%
Gamma
2.21 100%
2.2 100%
2.24 98%
2.024 109%
2.22 99%
2.27 97%
CCT
8100 80%
6263 104%
7846 83%
6649 98%
6422 101%
6267 104%

* ... 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 2336 Hz ≤ 24 Niveau de luminosité

Le rétroéclairage de l'écran scintille à la fréquence de 2336 Hz (certainement du fait de l'utilisation d'une MDI - Modulation de largeur d'impulsion) à un niveau de luminosité inférieur ou égal à 24 % . Aucun scintillement ne devrait être perceptible au-dessus de cette valeur.

La fréquence de rafraîchissement de 2336 Hz est élevée, la grande majorité des utilisateurs ne devrait pas percevoir de scintillements et être sujette à une fatigue oculaire accrue.

En comparaison, 51 % des appareils testés n'emploient pas MDI pour assombrir leur écran. Nous avons relevé une moyenne à 13573 (minimum : 43 - maximum : 2500000) 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
22 ms ... hausse ↗ et chute ↘ combinées↗ 6 ms hausse
↘ 16 ms chute
L'écran montre de bons temps de réponse, mais insuffisant pour du jeu compétitif.
En comparaison, tous les appareils testés affichent entre 0.8 (minimum) et 240 (maximum) ms. » 27 % des appareils testés affichent de meilleures performances.
Cela signifie que les latences relevées sont meilleures que la moyenne (24.9 ms) de tous les appareils testés.
       Temps de réponse gris 50% à gris 80%
53.2 ms ... hausse ↗ et chute ↘ combinées↗ 24.4 ms hausse
↘ 28.8 ms chute
L'écran souffre de latences très élevées, à éviter pour le jeu.
En comparaison, tous les appareils testés affichent entre 0.9 (minimum) et 636 (maximum) ms. » 88 % des appareils testés affichent de meilleures performances.
Cela signifie que les latences relevées sont moins bonnes que la moyenne (39.5 ms) de tous les appareils testés.
Geekbench 5
Vulkan Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
143 Points ∼11%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
422 Points ∼31% +195%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
422 Points ∼31% +195%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
1218 Points ∼90% +752%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
 
143 Points ∼11% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (143 - 3222, n=39)
1359 Points ∼100% +850%
OpenCL Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
425 Points ∼23%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
363 Points ∼20% -15%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
1793 Points ∼99% +322%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
 
425 Points ∼23% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (183 - 4593, n=45)
1816 Points ∼100% +327%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
1256 Points ∼66%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1327 Points ∼70% +6%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
1612 Points ∼85% +28%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
 
1256 Points ∼66% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (807 - 3575, n=57)
1894 Points ∼100% +51%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
278 Points ∼51%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
314 Points ∼58% +13%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
391 Points ∼72% +41%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
 
278 Points ∼51% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (150 - 1344, n=57)
541 Points ∼100% +95%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
5965 Points ∼60%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
6498 Points ∼65% +9%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
9967 Points ∼100% +67%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
5827 Points ∼58% -2%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
6483 Points ∼65% +9%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
6832 Points ∼69% +15%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (5611 - 6277, n=11)
5833 Points ∼59% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (2630 - 11690, n=412)
5405 Points ∼54% -9%
Work performance score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
6696 Points ∼45%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
7446 Points ∼50% +11%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
14946 Points ∼100% +123%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
7029 Points ∼47% +5%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
8125 Points ∼54% +21%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
8346 Points ∼56% +25%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (6040 - 7618, n=11)
6624 Points ∼44% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1077 - 15193, n=576)
5872 Points ∼39% -12%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
2175 Points ∼82%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2250 Points ∼85% +3%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2543 Points ∼96% +17%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
2338 Points ∼88% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (2175 - 2282, n=2)
2229 Points ∼84% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1740 - 15735, n=86)
2660 Points ∼100% +22%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
789 Points ∼30%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
898 Points ∼34% +14%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
1978 Points ∼74% +151%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
1907 Points ∼71% +142%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (789 - 809, n=2)
799 Points ∼30% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (203 - 14536, n=86)
2673 Points ∼100% +239%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (Vulkan) Unlimited (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
926 Points ∼38%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1036 Points ∼42% +12%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2087 Points ∼85% +125%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
Points ∼0% -100%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
1988 Points ∼81% +115%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (926 - 944, n=2)
935 Points ∼38% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (253 - 14786, n=86)
2453 Points ∼100% +165%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
2337 Points ∼70%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2298 Points ∼69% -2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3326 Points ∼100% +42%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2266 Points ∼68% -3%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2550 Points ∼77% +9%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
2506 Points ∼75% +7%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (2258 - 2644, n=11)
2372 Points ∼71% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (573 - 5576, n=420)
2008 Points ∼60% -14%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
855 Points ∼37%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
980 Points ∼42% +15%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2322 Points ∼100% +172%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1188 Points ∼51% +39%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
843 Points ∼36% -1%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
2146 Points ∼92% +151%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (645 - 872, n=11)
841 Points ∼36% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (75 - 8374, n=420)
1810 Points ∼78% +112%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
977 Points ∼41%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1134 Points ∼47% +16%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2412 Points ∼100% +147%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1328 Points ∼55% +36%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
981 Points ∼41% 0%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
2217 Points ∼92% +127%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (765 - 1016, n=11)
980 Points ∼41% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (93 - 6916, n=421)
1685 Points ∼70% +72%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
2288 Points ∼68%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2348 Points ∼70% +3%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3362 Points ∼100% +47%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2241 Points ∼67% -2%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2578 Points ∼77% +13%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
2506 Points ∼75% +10%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (2288 - 2683, n=11)
2386 Points ∼71% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (375 - 5133, n=448)
1915 Points ∼57% -16%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
1389 Points ∼57%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1668 Points ∼69% +20%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2323 Points ∼96% +67%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1553 Points ∼64% +12%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1336 Points ∼55% -4%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
2146 Points ∼89% +54%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (1358 - 1406, n=11)
1395 Points ∼58% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (70 - 20154, n=448)
2417 Points ∼100% +74%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Unlimited (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
1568 Points ∼65%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1778 Points ∼74% +13%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2412 Points ∼100% +54%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1667 Points ∼69% +6%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1494 Points ∼62% -5%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
2217 Points ∼92% +41%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (1525 - 1568, n=11)
1541 Points ∼64% -2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (88 - 10427, n=448)
2036 Points ∼84% +30%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
2335 Points ∼71%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2408 Points ∼73% +3%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3280 Points ∼100% +40%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2351 Points ∼72% +1%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2489 Points ∼76% +7%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
2480 Points ∼76% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (2251 - 2634, n=11)
2358 Points ∼72% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (486 - 4909, n=500)
1914 Points ∼58% -18%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
809 Points ∼36%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
967 Points ∼44% +20%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2218 Points ∼100% +174%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1149 Points ∼52% +42%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
819 Points ∼37% +1%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
1980 Points ∼89% +145%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (797 - 818, n=11)
812 Points ∼37% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (53 - 7150, n=500)
1504 Points ∼68% +86%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
945 Points ∼40%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1114 Points ∼47% +18%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2390 Points ∼100% +153%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1296 Points ∼54% +37%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
963 Points ∼40% +2%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
2073 Points ∼87% +119%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (934 - 962, n=11)
950 Points ∼40% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (68 - 6319, n=501)
1450 Points ∼61% +53%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
2339 Points ∼72%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2378 Points ∼73% +2%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3267 Points ∼100% +40%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2432 Points ∼74% +4%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2490 Points ∼76% +6%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
2480 Points ∼76% +6%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (1349 - 2626, n=11)
2280 Points ∼70% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (293 - 4900, n=540)
1777 Points ∼54% -24%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
1322 Points ∼60%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1607 Points ∼72% +22%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2219 Points ∼100% +68%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1279 Points ∼58% -3%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1256 Points ∼57% -5%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
1980 Points ∼89% +50%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (1313 - 1353, n=11)
1331 Points ∼60% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (43 - 11302, n=539)
1978 Points ∼89% +50%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
1467 Points ∼61%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1728 Points ∼72% +18%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
2390 Points ∼100% +63%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1430 Points ∼60% -3%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1414 Points ∼59% -4%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
2073 Points ∼87% +41%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (1458 - 1493, n=11)
1475 Points ∼62% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (55 - 8338, n=542)
1711 Points ∼72% +17%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
15876 Points ∼69%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
20354 Points ∼89% +28%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
22928 Points ∼100% +44%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
14353 Points ∼63% -10%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
12023 Points ∼52% -24%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
13686 Points ∼60% -14%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (15766 - 19365, n=11)
17020 Points ∼74% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (735 - 45072, n=700)
14390 Points ∼63% -9%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
21067 Points ∼48%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
24654 Points ∼57% +17%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
39137 Points ∼90% +86%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
16593 Points ∼38% -21%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
21643 Points ∼50% +3%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
43514 Points ∼100% +107%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (20610 - 21067, n=11)
20839 Points ∼48% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (536 - 209204, n=698)
22592 Points ∼52% +7%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
19635 Points ∼58%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
23534 Points ∼70% +20%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
33832 Points ∼100% +72%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
16037 Points ∼47% -18%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
18377 Points ∼54% -6%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
29316 Points ∼87% +49%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (19525 - 20404, n=11)
19846 Points ∼59% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (662 - 97276, n=698)
18254 Points ∼54% -7%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
35 fps ∼43%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
36 fps ∼44% +3%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
82 fps ∼100% +134%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
39 fps ∼48% +11%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
33 fps ∼40% -6%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
74 fps ∼90% +111%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (35 - 36, n=12)
35.6 fps ∼43% +2%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.5 - 322, n=713)
38.7 fps ∼47% +11%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
32 fps ∼55%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
33 fps ∼57% +3%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
58 fps ∼100% +81%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
36 fps ∼62% +13%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
31 fps ∼53% -3%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
58 fps ∼100% +81%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (30 - 40, n=12)
34.3 fps ∼59% +7%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 120, n=722)
28.5 fps ∼49% -11%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
16 fps ∼33%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
19 fps ∼39% +19%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
49 fps ∼100% +206%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
23 fps ∼47% +44%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
17 fps ∼35% +6%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
36 fps ∼73% +125%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (16 - 16, n=12)
16 fps ∼33% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.8 - 175, n=618)
22.4 fps ∼46% +40%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
15 fps ∼36%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
17 fps ∼40% +13%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
42 fps ∼100% +180%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
21 fps ∼50% +40%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
16 fps ∼38% +7%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
33 fps ∼79% +120%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (13 - 18, n=12)
15 fps ∼36% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 115, n=627)
19.7 fps ∼47% +31%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
6.3 fps ∼22%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
13 fps ∼45% +106%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
29 fps ∼100% +360%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
14 fps ∼48% +122%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
12 fps ∼41% +90%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
26 fps ∼90% +313%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (6.3 - 10, n=12)
9.68 fps ∼33% +54%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.87 - 117, n=483)
18.2 fps ∼63% +189%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
5.7 fps ∼22%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
12 fps ∼46% +111%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
26 fps ∼100% +356%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
13 fps ∼50% +128%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
11 fps ∼42% +93%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
24 fps ∼92% +321%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (5.7 - 12, n=12)
9.47 fps ∼36% +66%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.2 - 110, n=485)
17.1 fps ∼66% +200%
GFXBench
Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
2.3 fps ∼23%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
4.4 fps ∼44% +91%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
6.8 fps ∼68% +196%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
4.9 fps ∼49% +113%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
4.2 fps ∼42% +83%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
9.1 fps ∼91% +296%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (2 - 4.4, n=9)
3.27 fps ∼33% +42%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.61 - 60, n=210)
9.98 fps ∼100% +334%
2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
3.5 fps ∼32%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2.8 fps ∼25% -20%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
11 fps ∼100% +214%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
3.1 fps ∼28% -11%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2.6 fps ∼24% -26%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
5.8 fps ∼53% +66%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (2.2 - 3.5, n=9)
2.36 fps ∼21% -33%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.21 - 33, n=209)
6.9 fps ∼63% +97%
Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
5.4 fps ∼32%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
7.2 fps ∼42% +33%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
17 fps ∼100% +215%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
8.2 fps ∼48% +52%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
6.4 fps ∼38% +19%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
14 fps ∼82% +159%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (4.9 - 6.9, n=9)
5.59 fps ∼33% +4%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.4 - 60, n=214)
14.7 fps ∼86% +172%
1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
6 fps ∼32%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
8.1 fps ∼43% +35%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
19 fps ∼100% +217%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
9 fps ∼47% +50%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
7 fps ∼37% +17%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
16 fps ∼84% +167%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (5.4 - 6.1, n=9)
5.93 fps ∼31% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 87, n=214)
16.4 fps ∼86% +173%
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
6.3 fps ∼39%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
6.9 fps ∼43% +10%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
16 fps ∼100% +154%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
8.9 fps ∼56% +41%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
6.9 fps ∼43% +10%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
15 fps ∼94% +138%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (6.3 - 6.3, n=12)
6.3 fps ∼39% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (0.6 - 73, n=408)
12.4 fps ∼78% +97%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
5.4 fps ∼39%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
6.1 fps ∼44% +13%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
14 fps ∼100% +159%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
8.1 fps ∼58% +50%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
6.5 fps ∼46% +20%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
13 fps ∼93% +141%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (5.1 - 7.4, n=12)
5.96 fps ∼43% +10%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.1 - 60, n=412)
11.1 fps ∼79% +106%
Basemark GPU
1920x1080 OpenGL Medium Offscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
8.24 (min: 5.77, max: 20.65) fps ∼10%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
18.1 (min: 2.3, max: 44.7) fps ∼21%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
0 fps ∼0%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
14.51 fps ∼17%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
14.23 (min: 8.05, max: 26.52) fps ∼17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
 
7.5 fps ∼9%
Average of class Smartphone
  (8.24 - 4528, n=67)
84.4 fps ∼100%
Vulkan Medium Native (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
6.65 (min: 3.4, max: 18.65) fps ∼11%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
21.2 (min: 4.9, max: 40.7) fps ∼34%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
11.59 fps ∼19%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
12.76 (min: 7.68, max: 27.7) fps ∼21%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
 
6.63 fps ∼11%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.57 - 2850, n=60)
62 fps ∼100%
1920x1080 Vulkan Medium Offscreen (Classer selon les valeurs)
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
7.44 (min: 3.6, max: 21.99) fps ∼8%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
19.4 (min: 3.7, max: 33.6) fps ∼20%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
13.03 fps ∼14%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
14.18 (min: 8.4, max: 36.6) fps ∼15%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1.88 - 4462, n=57)
95.9 fps ∼100%
BaseMark OS II
Web (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
876 Points ∼75%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
937 Points ∼80% +7%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
1145 Points ∼98% +31%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
927 Points ∼79% +6%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1024 Points ∼87% +17%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
1172 Points ∼100% +34%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (876 - 1088, n=10)
1037 Points ∼88% +18%
Average of class Smartphone
  (7 - 1745, n=649)
767 Points ∼65% -12%
Graphics (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
1632 Points ∼47%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
1881 Points ∼54% +15%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3419 Points ∼99% +109%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
1957 Points ∼57% +20%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
1478 Points ∼43% -9%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
3453 Points ∼100% +112%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (1590 - 1632, n=10)
1608 Points ∼47% -1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (18 - 16996, n=649)
2126 Points ∼62% +30%
Memory (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
2024 Points ∼56%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2808 Points ∼78% +39%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3609 Points ∼100% +78%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2492 Points ∼69% +23%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
3036 Points ∼84% +50%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
2969 Points ∼82% +47%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (1236 - 2492, n=10)
1958 Points ∼54% -3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (21 - 7500, n=649)
1570 Points ∼44% -22%
System (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
4498 Points ∼73%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
5006 Points ∼81% +11%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
6155 Points ∼100% +37%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
5112 Points ∼83% +14%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
5146 Points ∼84% +14%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
5932 Points ∼96% +32%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (4320 - 5348, n=10)
4559 Points ∼74% +1%
Average of class Smartphone
  (369 - 14189, n=649)
3060 Points ∼50% -32%
Overall (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
1907 Points ∼62%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
2254 Points ∼74% +18%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
3054 Points ∼100% +60%
Samsung Galaxy A50
Samsung Exynos 9610, Mali-G72 MP3, 4096
2193 Points ∼72% +15%
Huawei P30 Lite
HiSilicon Kirin 710, Mali-G51 MP4, 4096
2201 Points ∼72% +15%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712, Adreno 616, 6144
2906 Points ∼95% +52%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
  (1734 - 2156, n=10)
1957 Points ∼64% +3%
Average of class Smartphone
  (1 - 6097, n=649)
1534 Points ∼50% -20%
AnTuTu v8
UX (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
27466 Points ∼60%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
27535 Points ∼60% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
27535 Points ∼60% 0%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
45630 Points ∼100% +66%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
 
27466 Points ∼60% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (6969 - 82947, n=34)
43209 Points ∼95% +57%
MEM (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
30326 Points ∼51%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
38271 Points ∼65% +26%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
38271 Points ∼65% +26%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
59227 Points ∼100% +95%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
 
30326 Points ∼51% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (24176 - 100390, n=34)
49471 Points ∼84% +63%
GPU (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
24483 Points ∼28%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
33000 Points ∼38% +35%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
33000 Points ∼38% +35%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
79602 Points ∼91% +225%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
 
24483 Points ∼28% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (5938 - 209164, n=34)
87479 Points ∼100% +257%
CPU (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
62945 Points ∼64%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
70889 Points ∼73% +13%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
70889 Points ∼73% +13%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
97626 Points ∼100% +55%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
 
62945 Points ∼64% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (40620 - 168185, n=34)
92654 Points ∼95% +47%
Total Score (Classer selon les valeurs)
Nokia 6.2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636, Adreno 509, 4096
145220 Points ∼51%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
169695 Points ∼60% +17%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665, Adreno 610, 6144
169695 Points ∼60% +17%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Mediatek Helio G90T, Mali-G76 MP4, 6144
282085 Points ∼100% +94%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
 
145220 Points ∼51% 0%
Average of class Smartphone
  (84645 - 534558, n=34)
272813 Points ∼97% +88%
Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE (Chrome 73)
37.214 Points ∼100% +41%
Average of class Smartphone (9.13 - 133, n=118)
36.3 Points ∼98% +37%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78)
35.298 Points ∼95% +34%
Huawei P30 Lite (Chrome 74)
31.781 Points ∼85% +20%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 (Chrome 78)
30.65 Points ∼82% +16%
Nokia 6.2 (Chrome 79)
26.434 Points ∼71%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (26 - 26.4, n=2)
26.2 Points ∼70% -1%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78)
41.6 runs/min ∼100% +63%
Average of class Smartphone (6.42 - 157, n=106)
40 runs/min ∼96% +57%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE (Chrome 73)
37.5 runs/min ∼90% +47%
Samsung Galaxy A50 (Chome 73)
33.07 runs/min ∼79% +30%
Huawei P30 Lite (Chrome 74)
31.7 runs/min ∼76% +24%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 (Chrome 78)
30.8 runs/min ∼74% +21%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (25.5 - 27.4, n=2)
26.5 runs/min ∼64% +4%
Nokia 6.2 (Chrome 79)
25.5 runs/min ∼61%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE (Chrome 73)
72 Points ∼100% +57%
Average of class Smartphone (19 - 184, n=178)
67.5 Points ∼94% +47%
Huawei P30 Lite (Chrome 74)
66 Points ∼92% +43%
Samsung Galaxy A50 (Chrome 73)
62 Points ∼86% +35%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78)
55 Points ∼76% +20%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (46 - 61, n=9)
54.4 Points ∼76% +18%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 (Chrome 78)
52 Points ∼72% +13%
Nokia 6.2 (Chrome 79)
46 Points ∼64%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78)
15606 Points ∼100% +78%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE (Chrome 73)
13562 Points ∼87% +55%
Samsung Galaxy A50 (Chrome 73)
10322 Points ∼66% +18%
Huawei P30 Lite (Chrome 74)
9779 Points ∼63% +12%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 (Chrome 78)
9405 Points ∼60% +7%
Nokia 6.2 (Chrome 79)
8756 Points ∼56%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (8163 - 9746, n=12)
8665 Points ∼56% -1%
Average of class Smartphone (894 - 49388, n=707)
6952 Points ∼45% -21%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Smartphone (571 - 59466, n=732)
10406 ms * ∼100% -105%
Nokia 6.2 (Chrome 79)
5065.7 ms * ∼49%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 (4105 - 5066, n=12)
4687 ms * ∼45% +7%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 (Chrome 78)
4561.76 ms * ∼44% +10%
Huawei P30 Lite (Chrome 74)
4137.8 ms * ∼40% +18%
Samsung Galaxy A50 (Chrome 73)
3897 ms * ∼37% +23%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro (Chrome 78)
3001.5 ms * ∼29% +41%
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE (Chrome 73)
2911.8 ms * ∼28% +43%

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

Nokia 6.2Xiaomi Redmi Note 8Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 ProSamsung Galaxy A50Huawei P30 LiteXiaomi Mi 9 SEAverage 64 GB eMMC FlashAverage of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5
82%
215%
21%
80%
45%
4%
-9%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
61.55 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
52.83 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-14%
57.33 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-7%
60.7 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-1%
67.85 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
10%
57.8 (11.2 - 74.7, n=109)
-6%
49.8 (1.7 - 87.1, n=449)
-19%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
83.36 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
71.63 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-14%
71.61 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-14%
73.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-11%
76.83 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
-8%
76.8 (21.1 - 87.2, n=109)
-8%
68 (8.1 - 96.5, n=449)
-18%
Random Write 4KB
14.88
91.23
513%
180.4
1112%
18.2
22%
87.29
487%
21.86
47%
25.2 (3.4 - 125, n=123)
69%
24 (0.14 - 259, n=776)
61%
Random Read 4KB
78.83
84.76
8%
156.22
98%
98.9
25%
71.57
-9%
115.83
47%
55.5 (11.4 - 149, n=123)
-30%
49.3 (1.59 - 226, n=776)
-37%
Sequential Write 256KB
158.54
160.53
1%
193.54
22%
192.1
21%
158.63
0%
190.1
20%
172 (40 - 254, n=123)
8%
101 (2.99 - 590, n=776)
-36%
Sequential Read 256KB
296.76
297.65
0%
534.5
80%
507.3
71%
293.23
-1%
492.48
66%
274 (95.6 - 704, n=123)
-8%
283 (12.1 - 1781, n=776)
-5%
 36.7 °C36.9 °C37.3 °C 
 35.9 °C36.3 °C37.7 °C 
 35 °C35.2 °C36 °C 
Maximum: 37.7 °C
Moyenne: 36.3 °C
33 °C34.4 °C36.2 °C
32.1 °C34.8 °C36.5 °C
33.2 °C34.7 °C35.4 °C
Maximum: 36.5 °C
Moyenne: 34.5 °C
Alimentation (valeur maximale)  27.2 °C | Température ambiante de la pièce 21.7 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 36.3 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 33 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 37.7 °C / 100 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 36.5 °C / 98 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.5 °C / 82 F, compared to the device average of 33 °C / 91 F.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2029.832.82525.224.33121.623.14024.722.65029.631.86322.519.88025.120.610020.120.612519.92216020.830.220017.631.825017.638.931517.445.240016.151.850013.957.763014.559.680016.167.3100014.572.4125014.470.6160013.668.6200013.972.8250014.576.1315014.475.2400014.871.4500014.775630014.869.2800014.963.31000015.161125001550.61600015.144.3SPL26.983.9N0.952.3median 14.9median 61Delta1.514.634.933.929.124.125.424.329.426.239.43427.324.821.622.1242320.722.519.938.51840.916.847.516.253.315.957.613.559.213.962.312.964.91465.414.766.614.168.214.268.714.569.815.470.614.97014.867.51562.815.360.815.360.515.64415.535.12779.30.942.8median 15.3median 60.81.311.5hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseNokia 6.2Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Nokia 6.2 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 29.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.6% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 9.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (31.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 86% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 8% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 90% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 6% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (79.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (24.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 49% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 40% worse
» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 69% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 24% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Consommation énergétique
Éteint/en veilledarklight 0.01 / 0.11 Watts
Au reposdarkmidlight 0.72 / 2.22 / 2.23 Watts
Fortement sollicité midlight 3.98 / 6.86 Watts
 color bar
Légende: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Nokia 6.2
3500 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
4500 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A50
4000 mAh
Huawei P30 Lite
3340 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
3070 mAh
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
 
Average of class Smartphone
 
Power Consumption
15%
-11%
-5%
-14%
35%
-13%
4%
Idle Minimum *
0.72
0.62
14%
0.79
-10%
0.8
-11%
0.91
-26%
0.53
26%
0.944 (0.6 - 1.75, n=12)
-31%
0.881 (0.2 - 3.4, n=800)
-22%
Idle Average *
2.22
1.77
20%
2.32
-5%
1.5
32%
2.41
-9%
1.18
47%
2.22 (1.4 - 4.48, n=12)
-0%
1.741 (0.6 - 6.2, n=799)
22%
Idle Maximum *
2.23
1.8
19%
2.38
-7%
1.7
24%
2.43
-9%
1.2
46%
2.54 (2 - 4.5, n=12)
-14%
2.03 (0.74 - 6.6, n=800)
9%
Load Average *
3.98
3.42
14%
4.72
-19%
5.9
-48%
4.57
-15%
3.04
24%
4.51 (3.65 - 7.92, n=12)
-13%
4.07 (0.8 - 10.8, n=794)
-2%
Load Maximum *
6.86
6.14
10%
7.68
-12%
8.3
-21%
7.57
-10%
4.83
30%
7.37 (5.1 - 13.6, n=12)
-7%
5.94 (1.2 - 14.2, n=794)
13%

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

Autonomie
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
10h 11min
Nokia 6.2
3500 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8
4000 mAh
Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro
4500 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A50
4000 mAh
Huawei P30 Lite
3340 mAh
Xiaomi Mi 9 SE
3070 mAh
Autonomie de la batterie
WiFi v1.3
611
824
35%
864
41%
701
15%
515
-16%
510
-17%

Points positifs

+ qualité de construction
+ mises à jour
+ luminosité de l'écran IPS
+ double SIM
+ autonomie

Points négatifs

- MLI
- haut-parleurs
- micro SD sans ex-FAT
- SoC

Verdict

En test : le Nokia 6.2. Modèle de test aimablement fourni par notebooksbilliger.de.
En test : le Nokia 6.2. Modèle de test aimablement fourni par notebooksbilliger.de.

Le Nokia 6.2 s’avère réussi, grâce à son design moderne, son allure premium et son écran IPS lumineux. La fonctionnalité double SIM non bridée et la fluidité du système combinées avec le petit prix d’environ 200 € font de cette dernière proposition en date de Nokia un modèle intéressant. Malheureusement, Nokia utilise une fois de plus la MLI pour réguler la luminosité de l’appareil, et même si sa fréquence est assez élevée pour ne pas affecter la plupart des utilisateurs, elle pourra cependant gêner les personnes sensibles.

Le Nokia 6.2 est un bon choix pour les puristes Android soucieux du prix.

Cela dit, le Redmi Note 8 est un concurrent crédible, surtout grâce à son prix encore plus bas, et parce qu’il est un peu meilleur que le Nokia 6.2. Mais ce dernier possède un meilleur service de mise à jour et de patchs de sécurité, qui seront en permanence à jour.

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

Nokia 6.2 - 01/03/2020 v7
Marcus Herbrich

Châssis
87%
Clavier
66 / 75 → 88%
Dispositif de pointage
91%
Connectivité
49 / 70 → 70%
Poids
90%
Autonomie
88%
Écran
83%
Performances en jeu
11 / 64 → 18%
Performances dans les applications
53 / 86 → 62%
Chauffe
92%
Nuisance sonore
100%
Audio
67 / 90 → 74%
Appareil photo
58%
Moyenne
72%
78%
Smartphone - Moyenne compensée

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Revues et rapports de ordinateurs portatifs et smartphones, ordiphones > Critiques > Test du Nokia 6.2 : Android One avec une vraie double SIM et un emplacement SD
Marcus Herbrich, 2020-01-15 (Update: 2020-01-15)