Notebookcheck

Apple iPhone X Smartphone rövid értékelés

Patrick Afschar, Klaus Hinum, Andreas Osthoff, Daniel Schmidt (fordította Tamás Somogyi), 11/28/2017
Apple iPhone Smartphone Touchscreen

Nem forradalmi. Az Apple az iPhone 10. születésnapjára adta ki az iPhone X-et, és a "szokványos" iPhone-ok mellett árulja. A legfőbb vonzereje egyértelműen az ultra keskeny keretes OLED kijelző. Az elképzelés a gyakorlatban is beválik, és a Home gombot sem hiányoljuk.

Apple iPhone X (iPhone Széria)
Processzor
Apple A11 Bionic
Grafikus adapter
Apple A11 Bionic GPU
Memória
3072 MB 
, Samsung LPDDR4x
Kijelző
5.8 hüvelyk 2:1, 2436x1125 pixel 463 PPI, kapacitív, Apple True Tone Super Retina HD, HDR, Super AMOLED, karcálló üveg, fényes: igen
Háttértár
64 GB eMMC Flash, 64 GB 
, 64GB vagy 256GB, 58.7 GB ingyenes
Csatlakozók
1 USB 3.0, Audió csatlakozók: Lightning port, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Szenzorok: 3 tengelyes giroszenzor, gyorsulásmérő, közelségérzékelő, iránytű, barométer, Lightning
Hálózat
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM/GPRS/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, and 1900 MHz), UMTS/HSPA+ (850, 900, 1700/2100, 1900, and 2100 MHz), LTE (FDD band 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, and 66; TDD: 34, 38, 39, 40, and 41), LTE, GPS
Méret
magasság x szélesség x mélység (mm-ben) 7.7 x 143.6 x 70.9
Akkumulátor
2716 mAh Lítium-Ion, Beszédidő 3G (gyártói adat): 21 h, Készenlét 3G (gyártói adat): 60 h
Operációs rendszer
Apple iOS 11
Camera
Primary Camera: 12 MPix Dual 12 MP, f/1.8 & f/2.4, 2x optikai zoom, quad-LED vaku, [email protected]/30/60 fps, [email protected]/60/120/240 fps
Secondary Camera: 7 MPix f/2.2, [email protected], [email protected]
További jellegzetességek
Hangszórók: sztereo, Billentyűzet: virtuális, EarPods Lightning csatlakozóval, Lightning / 3.5 mm sztereo jack adapter, Lightning / USB adapterkábel, USB töltő adapter, kézikönyv, 12 Hónap Garancia, Face ID, vezeték nélküli töltés (Qi), IP67 minősítés, feji SAR: 0.98 W/kg, fanless
Súly
174 g, Tápegység: 46 g
Ár
1149 Euró
Hivatkozások

 

Size Comparison

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Apple iPhone X
939 MBit/s ∼100%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
914 MBit/s ∼97% -3%
Sony Xperia XZ1
489 MBit/s ∼52% -48%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
338 MBit/s ∼36% -64%
Samsung Galaxy S8
329 MBit/s ∼35% -65%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy S8
651 MBit/s ∼100% +43%
Sony Xperia XZ1
500 MBit/s ∼77% +10%
Apple iPhone X
456 MBit/s ∼70%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
374 MBit/s ∼57% -18%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
225 MBit/s ∼35% -51%

Legend

 
Apple iPhone X Apple A11 Bionic, Apple A11 Bionic GPU, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Apple iPhone 8 Plus Apple A11 Bionic, Apple A11 Bionic GPU, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
 
Samsung Galaxy S8 Samsung Exynos 8895 Octa, ARM Mali-G71 MP20, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Huawei Mate 10 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 970, ARM Mali-G72 MP12, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Sony Xperia XZ1 Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
Apple iPhone X: Overview
Apple iPhone X: Overview
Apple iPhone X: Forest section
Apple iPhone X: Forest section
Apple iPhone X: Bridge crossing
Apple iPhone X: Bridge crossing
Garmin Edge 500: Overview
Garmin Edge 500: Overview
Garmin Edge 500: Forest section
Garmin Edge 500: Forest section
Garmin Edge 500: Bridge crossing
Garmin Edge 500: Bridge crossing

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
Test chart main camera iPhone X
ColorChecker Passport: The target color is displayed in the bottom half of every patch.
629
cd/m²
603
cd/m²
596
cd/m²
622
cd/m²
600
cd/m²
594
cd/m²
624
cd/m²
598
cd/m²
590
cd/m²
Fényerő megoszlás
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 629 cd/m² Átlag: 606.2 cd/m² Minimum: 1.87 cd/m²
Fényerő megoszlás: 94 %
Centrumban: 600 cd/m²
Kontraszt: ∞:1 (Fekete: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.2 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 1.6 | - Ø
99.3% sRGB (Calman)
Gamma: 2.23
Apple iPhone X
Super AMOLED, 2436x1125, 5.8
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.5
Samsung Galaxy S8
Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 5.8
OnePlus 5
AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.5
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
IPS, 3840x2160, 5.5
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
OLED, 2160x1080, 6
Screen
-9%
-57%
-17%
-54%
-22%
Brightness
606
538
-11%
564
-7%
431
-29%
568
-6%
636
5%
Brightness Distribution
94
90
-4%
94
0%
93
-1%
92
-2%
94
0%
Black Level *
0.38
0.62
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
1.2
1.3
-8%
2.7
-125%
1.6
-33%
2.8
-133%
1.7
-42%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.6
1.8
-13%
3.1
-94%
1.7
-6%
2.8
-75%
2.4
-50%
Gamma
2.23 108%
2.25 107%
2.15 112%
2.25 107%
2.15 112%
2.15 112%
CCT
6707 97%
6797 96%
6335 103%
6329 103%
6728 97%
6337 103%
Contrast
1471
932
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
81.57
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
99.87

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM detected 240 Hz100 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 240 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 100 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 240 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 54 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8499 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
1.7 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 0.85 ms rise
↘ 0.81 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 0 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (26.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
2.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 1.4 ms rise
↘ 1.4 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 0 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (42.4 ms).
Viewing angles reference image
Viewing angles reference image
AnTuTu Benchmark v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
197851 Points ∼87%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
218158 Points ∼96% +10%
LG G6
151751 Points ∼67% -23%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
173997 Points ∼76% -12%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
177341 Points ∼78% -10%
Sony Xperia XZ1
167748 Points ∼74% -15%
Google Pixel 2 XL
166151 Points ∼73% -16%
OnePlus 5
177156 Points ∼78% -10%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
173403 Points ∼76% -12%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
1682 Points ∼99%
LG G6
1073 Points ∼63% -36%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
1235 Points ∼73% -27%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
1234 Points ∼73% -27%
Sony Xperia XZ1
1181 Points ∼70% -30%
Google Pixel 2 XL
1186 Points ∼70% -29%
OnePlus 5
1287 Points ∼76% -23%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
1239 Points ∼73% -26%
Graphics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
9248 Points ∼100%
LG G6
5138 Points ∼56% -44%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
6121 Points ∼66% -34%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
3657 Points ∼40% -60%
Sony Xperia XZ1
5923 Points ∼64% -36%
Google Pixel 2 XL
6142 Points ∼66% -34%
OnePlus 5
6144 Points ∼66% -34%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
6045 Points ∼65% -35%
Memory (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
1219 Points ∼28%
LG G6
1930 Points ∼44% +58%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3095 Points ∼70% +154%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
4142 Points ∼94% +240%
Sony Xperia XZ1
1752 Points ∼40% +44%
Google Pixel 2 XL
2927 Points ∼66% +140%
OnePlus 5
4423 Points ∼100% +263%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
3444 Points ∼78% +183%
System (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
10281 Points ∼100%
LG G6
3646 Points ∼35% -65%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
5308 Points ∼52% -48%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
5244 Points ∼51% -49%
Sony Xperia XZ1
5840 Points ∼57% -43%
Google Pixel 2 XL
5914 Points ∼58% -42%
OnePlus 5
5902 Points ∼57% -43%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
5857 Points ∼57% -43%
Overall (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
3737 Points ∼99%
LG G6
2496 Points ∼66% -33%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3338 Points ∼88% -11%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
3147 Points ∼83% -16%
Sony Xperia XZ1
2909 Points ∼77% -22%
Google Pixel 2 XL
3351 Points ∼88% -10%
OnePlus 5
3790 Points ∼100% +1%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
3506 Points ∼93% -6%
Geekbench 4.1/4.2
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
LG G6
7080 Points ∼83%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
8310 Points ∼97%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
8572 Points ∼100%
Sony Xperia XZ1
7979 Points ∼93%
Google Pixel 2 XL
7568 Points ∼88%
OnePlus 5
8005 Points ∼93%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
7881 Points ∼92%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
10255 Points ∼41%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
10558 Points ∼42% +3%
LG G6
4369 Points ∼17% -57%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
6744 Points ∼27% -34%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
6792 Points ∼27% -34%
Sony Xperia XZ1
6493 Points ∼26% -37%
Google Pixel 2 XL
6253 Points ∼25% -39%
OnePlus 5
6799 Points ∼27% -34%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
6491 Points ∼26% -37%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
4265 Points ∼72%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
4263 Points ∼72% 0%
LG G6
1831 Points ∼31% -57%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2028 Points ∼34% -52%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
1898 Points ∼32% -55%
Sony Xperia XZ1
1856 Points ∼31% -56%
Google Pixel 2 XL
1916 Points ∼32% -55%
OnePlus 5
1973 Points ∼33% -54%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
1904 Points ∼32% -55%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
2361 Points ∼77%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
2109 Points ∼69% -11%
LG G6
1955 Points ∼64% -17%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2346 Points ∼76% -1%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
2871 Points ∼93% +22%
Sony Xperia XZ1
2928 Points ∼95% +24%
Google Pixel 2 XL
3028 Points ∼98% +28%
OnePlus 5
3026 Points ∼98% +28%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
1628 Points ∼53% -31%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
3463 Points ∼64%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
3069 Points ∼57% -11%
LG G6
2980 Points ∼55% -14%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2661 Points ∼49% -23%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
2844 Points ∼53% -18%
Sony Xperia XZ1
3961 Points ∼74% +14%
Google Pixel 2 XL
3872 Points ∼72% +12%
OnePlus 5
3757 Points ∼70% +8%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
3723 Points ∼69% +8%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
3138 Points ∼81%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
2781 Points ∼72% -11%
LG G6
2669 Points ∼69% -15%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2584 Points ∼67% -18%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
2850 Points ∼73% -9%
Sony Xperia XZ1
3673 Points ∼95% +17%
Google Pixel 2 XL
3646 Points ∼94% +16%
OnePlus 5
3566 Points ∼92% +14%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
2895 Points ∼75% -8%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
LG G6
1961 Points ∼64%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
2342 Points ∼76%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
2896 Points ∼94%
Sony Xperia XZ1
2564 Points ∼83%
Google Pixel 2 XL
2995 Points ∼97%
OnePlus 5
3012 Points ∼98%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
1574 Points ∼51%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
LG G6
4121 Points ∼53%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3928 Points ∼51%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
3353 Points ∼43%
Sony Xperia XZ1
6057 Points ∼78%
Google Pixel 2 XL
5856 Points ∼76%
OnePlus 5
4765 Points ∼62%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
5107 Points ∼66%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
LG G6
3282 Points ∼66%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
3414 Points ∼69%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
3239 Points ∼65%
Sony Xperia XZ1
4649 Points ∼93%
Google Pixel 2 XL
4831 Points ∼97%
OnePlus 5
4219 Points ∼85%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
3407 Points ∼68%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
25633 Points ∼36%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
25641 Points ∼36% 0%
LG G6
22335 Points ∼31% -13%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
22829 Points ∼32% -11%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
22629 Points ∼31% -12%
Sony Xperia XZ1
23046 Points ∼32% -10%
Google Pixel 2 XL
20233 Points ∼28% -21%
OnePlus 5
19411 Points ∼27% -24%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
13800 Points ∼19% -46%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
112489 Points ∼25%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
113380 Points ∼25% +1%
LG G6
32128 Points ∼7% -71%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
36807 Points ∼8% -67%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
34008 Points ∼7% -70%
Sony Xperia XZ1
47857 Points ∼11% -57%
Google Pixel 2 XL
54156 Points ∼12% -52%
OnePlus 5
58001 Points ∼13% -48%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
52358 Points ∼12% -53%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
64169 Points ∼33%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
64405 Points ∼33% 0%
LG G6
29276 Points ∼15% -54%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
32399 Points ∼16% -50%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
30590 Points ∼16% -52%
Sony Xperia XZ1
31618 Points ∼16% -51%
Google Pixel 2 XL
39456 Points ∼20% -39%
OnePlus 5
40229 Points ∼20% -37%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
32302 Points ∼16% -50%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
177.4 fps ∼13%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
166.9 fps ∼12% -6%
LG G6
75 fps ∼5% -58%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
105 fps ∼8% -41%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
112 fps ∼8% -37%
Sony Xperia XZ1
111 fps ∼8% -37%
Google Pixel 2 XL
112 fps ∼8% -37%
OnePlus 5
115 fps ∼8% -35%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
109 fps ∼8% -39%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
59.4 fps ∼13%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
119.4 fps ∼26% +101%
LG G6
46 fps ∼10% -23%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
59 fps ∼13% -1%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
60 fps ∼13% +1%
Sony Xperia XZ1
60 fps ∼13% +1%
Google Pixel 2 XL
59 fps ∼13% -1%
OnePlus 5
60 fps ∼13% +1%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
60 fps ∼13% +1%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
88.2 fps ∼16%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
71 fps ∼13% -20%
LG G6
38 fps ∼7% -57%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
51 fps ∼9% -42%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
54 fps ∼10% -39%
Sony Xperia XZ1
56 fps ∼10% -37%
Google Pixel 2 XL
59 fps ∼11% -33%
OnePlus 5
61 fps ∼11% -31%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
47 fps ∼9% -47%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
58.5 fps ∼16%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
79.2 fps ∼22% +35%
LG G6
27 fps ∼7% -54%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
38 fps ∼10% -35%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
56 fps ∼15% -4%
Sony Xperia XZ1
52 fps ∼14% -11%
Google Pixel 2 XL
35 fps ∼10% -40%
OnePlus 5
56 fps ∼15% -4%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
46 fps ∼13% -21%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
48.9 fps ∼12%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
49 fps ∼12% 0%
LG G6
29 fps ∼7% -41%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
42 fps ∼10% -14%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
37 fps ∼9% -24%
Sony Xperia XZ1
41 fps ∼10% -16%
Google Pixel 2 XL
41 fps ∼10% -16%
OnePlus 5
42 fps ∼10% -14%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
35 fps ∼8% -28%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
44.1 fps ∼25%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
56.4 fps ∼32% +28%
LG G6
16 fps ∼9% -64%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
23 fps ∼13% -48%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
38 fps ∼22% -14%
Sony Xperia XZ1
42 fps ∼24% -5%
Google Pixel 2 XL
20 fps ∼11% -55%
OnePlus 5
41 fps ∼23% -7%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
37 fps ∼21% -16%
GFXBench 4.0
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
LG G6
20 fps ∼6%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
25 fps ∼7%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
21 fps ∼6%
Sony Xperia XZ1
24 fps ∼7%
Google Pixel 2 XL
24 fps ∼7%
OnePlus 5
25 fps ∼7%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
23 fps ∼7%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
LG G6
11 fps ∼0%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
13 fps ∼0%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
22 fps ∼1%
Sony Xperia XZ1
25 fps ∼1%
Google Pixel 2 XL
13 fps ∼0%
OnePlus 5
25 fps ∼1%
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
25 fps ∼1%
Basemark ES 3.1 / Metal - offscreen Overall Score (sort by value)
Apple iPhone X
1702 Points ∼91%
LG G6
647 Points ∼35% -62%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8
1295 Points ∼69% -24%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
788 Points ∼42% -54%
Google Pixel 2 XL
853 Points ∼46% -50%

Legend

 
Apple iPhone X Apple A11 Bionic, Apple A11 Bionic GPU, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Apple iPhone 8 Plus Apple A11 Bionic, Apple A11 Bionic GPU, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
 
LG G6 Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 Samsung Exynos 8895 Octa, ARM Mali-G71 MP20, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Huawei Mate 10 Pro HiSilicon Kirin 970, ARM Mali-G72 MP12, 128 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Sony Xperia XZ1 Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Google Pixel 2 XL Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
OnePlus 5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Sony Xperia XZ Premium Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540, 64 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Apple iPhone X (IOS 11.1.1)
224 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
223.5 Points ∼100% 0%
OnePlus 5 (Chrome 59)
71.6 Points ∼32% -68%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (Samsung Browser 6.0)
69.57 Points ∼31% -69%
Samsung Galaxy S8 (Samsung Browser 5.2)
65.846 Points ∼29% -71%
Google Pixel 2 XL (Chrome 62)
64.709 Points ∼29% -71%
Sony Xperia XZ1 (Chrome 61)
61.335 Points ∼27% -73%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro (Chrome 61)
56.63 Points ∼25% -75%
LG G6 (Chrome 57)
56.628 Points ∼25% -75%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone X (IOS 11.1.2)
35255 Points ∼100%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
35209 Points ∼100% 0%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (Samsung Browser 6.0)
13265 Points ∼38% -62%
Samsung Galaxy S8 (Samsung Browser 5.2)
12941 Points ∼37% -63%
OnePlus 5 (Chrome 59)
11945 Points ∼34% -66%
Google Pixel 2 XL (Chrome 62)
11308 Points ∼32% -68%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro (Chrome 61)
10406 Points ∼30% -70%
Sony Xperia XZ1 (Chrome 61)
10096 Points ∼29% -71%
LG G6 (Chrome 57)
9113 Points ∼26% -74%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Huawei Mate 10 Pro (Chrome 61)
3590.6 ms * ∼100% -400%
Google Pixel 2 XL (Chrome 62)
3434.1 ms * ∼96% -378%
Sony Xperia XZ1 (Chrome 61)
3267.9 ms * ∼91% -355%
OnePlus 5 (Chrome 59)
2621.7 ms * ∼73% -265%
LG G6 (Chrome 57)
2464.2 ms * ∼69% -243%
Samsung Galaxy S8 (Samsung Browser 5.2)
1886.6 ms * ∼53% -163%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (Samsung Browser 6.0)
1876.8 ms * ∼52% -161%
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
719.7 ms * ∼20% -0%
Apple iPhone X (IOS 11.1.2)
718 ms * ∼20%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
362 Points ∼100% +2%
Apple iPhone X
354 Points ∼98%
Samsung Galaxy S8 (Samsung Browser 5.2)
194 Points ∼54% -45%
Google Pixel 2 XL (Chrome 62)
194 Points ∼54% -45%
Sony Xperia XZ1 (Chrome 61)
170 Points ∼47% -52%
OnePlus 5 (Chrome 59)
161 Points ∼44% -55%
Samsung Galaxy Note 8 (Samsung Browser 6.0)
159 Points ∼44% -55%
Huawei Mate 10 Pro (Chrome 61)
158 Points ∼44% -55%
LG G6 (Chrome 57)
122 Points ∼34% -66%

* ... smaller is better

Asphalt 8: Airborne
 BeállításokÉrték
 high30 fps
összehasonlítva
Lenovo Moto E3 (min)
 MT6735P, Mali-T720
11
   ...
Asus ZenFone 4 ZE554KL
 630, Adreno 508
30
BlackBerry KeyOne
 625, Adreno 506
30
Apple iPhone X
 A11 Bionic, A11 Bionic GPU
30
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
 835, Adreno 540
30
Asus ZenFone 3 Deluxe ZS570KL
 821 MSM8996 Pro, Adreno 530
30
   ...
HTC 10 (max)
 820 MSM8996, Adreno 530
48
Dead Trigger 2
 BeállításokÉrték
 high59 fps
Max. terhelés
 34 °C37 °C35 °C 
 34 °C38 °C37 °C 
 33 °C39 °C38 °C 
Maximum: 39 °C
Átlag: 36.1 °C
37 °C45 °C44 °C
36 °C37 °C39 °C
33 °C35 °C35 °C
Maximum: 45 °C
Átlag: 37.9 °C
Szobahőmérséklet 20 °C | Fluke 62 Mini, AMPROBE TMD-50
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2039.638.22533.633.13131.232.14030.832.15030.734.36334358030.939.410028.736.412526.247.91602651.920025.354.82502557.231523.359.640022.362.550021.164.863020.167.780019.568.1100020.166.2125019.669.3160018.87320001874.8250017.877.3315017.676400017.675.5500017.773.5630017.873.880001871.41000017.765.41250017.853.51600017.848.5SPL31.285.3N1.661.7median 19.5Apple iPhone Xmedian 66.2Delta3.29.231.635.825.440.125.335.532.931.933.631.631.638.928.433.82727.220.828.62236.421.342.620.851.521.258.619.465.719.571.417.770.717.968.317.870.717.370.317.462.516.760.817.258.318.265.317.967.817.672.417.770.617.871.517.97318.164.518.249.33081.41.351.2median 17.9HTC U11median 65.31.310.635.237.832.934.237.235.631.737.139.64028.327.927.32626.924.326.723.72433.420.941.220.951.919.551.218.560.317.55617.555.915.755.115.865.716.669.515.874.215.47715.574.91673.315.870.41670.816.373.116.372.916.273.516.468.816.455.828.684.41.154.7median 16.4Huawei Mate 10 Promedian 65.72.110.8hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Apple iPhone X audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85.3 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 4% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 90% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 32% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 61% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

HTC U11 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.1% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.1% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 15% of all tested devices in this class were better, 13% similar, 72% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 47% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 45% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Huawei Mate 10 Pro audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 28.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 7.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (9.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (25.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 50% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 38% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 71% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 22% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Energiafogyasztás
Kikapcsolt állapot / Készenlétdarklight 0.66 / 0.18 Watt
Üresjáratdarkmidlight 1.03 / 2.4 / 2.6 Watt
Terhelés midlight 2.96 / 6.6 Watt
 color bar
Kulcs: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Akkumulátor üzemidő
Üresjárat (WLAN nélkül, minimális fényerő)
21h 32min
WiFi böngészés v1.3
9h 24min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
10h 34min
Terhelés (maximális fényerő)
3h 00min
Apple iPhone X
2716 mAh
Apple iPhone 8 Plus
2691 mAh
Apple iPhone 8
1821 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S8 Plus
3500 mAh
Huawei Mate 10 Pro
4000 mAh
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
3230 mAh
OnePlus 5
3300 mAh
Battery Runtime
28%
13%
30%
51%
29%
12%
Reader / Idle
1292
2085
61%
1629
26%
1565
21%
1744
35%
1754
36%
1534
19%
H.264
634
733
16%
698
10%
742
17%
642
1%
802
26%
623
-2%
WiFi v1.3
564
657
16%
585
4%
736
30%
818
45%
695
23%
518
-8%
Load
180
211
17%
202
12%
275
53%
398
121%
236
31%
247
37%

Pro

+ kitűnő True Tone kijelző
+ erős lapkakészlet
+ szép design
+ remek kivitelezés
+ gyors Wi-Fi
+ Bluetooth 5.0
+ gazdag LTE sáv támogatottság
+ nagyon jó kamerarendszer
+ IP67 minősítés

Kontra

- viszonylag nehéz
- nem bővíthető tárhelykapacitás
- csak 12 hó jótállás
- erősen korlátozott NFC funkcionalitás
- nincs sztereo jack
In review: Apple iPhone X
In review: Apple iPhone X

Az Apple iPhone X specifikációi és képességei nagyon hasonlóak az iPhone 8 Plus-hoz, de ez nem egy negatívum. A különbségek is észre vehetők, és főleg a külsőt érintik. Az Apple egyrészt először használ 2:1 arányú panelt - az eddigi legnagyobbat egy iPhone-ban - másrészt OLED technológiát sem alkalmazott az eddigiekben. A kijelző nagyon jó, de a szokatlan design nem mindenkinek fog tetszeni.

A Home gomb és a Touch ID mellőzése a második nagy változás. Mindkettőt a Face ID váltja ki. Ez az arcot szkenneli le, de mivel lehetséges visszaélni a technológiával, ezért adatvédelmi szempontból érdemes kissé óvatosan kezelni a témát. Az Apple azt állítja, hogy az arc adatai csak az iPhone-on tárolódnak, és az alkalmazások csak személyazonosításra küldhetnek kérelmet, de ez végeredményben akkor is bizalmi kérdés marad. Ez a szkepticizmus akkor is jelen volt, amikor az ujjlenyomat olvasó a telefonokba került, de manapság nem sokan törődnek már vele, mivel kényelmesebbé teszi az életünket. A Face ID pedig szintén kényelmes, és már most is nagyon jól működik.  

Modern technológia, új design és Face ID – ez az iPhone X. Ez viszont nem elég az okostelefonok trónjához.

A fentiek mellé egy jó kamerát kapunk, amely elég jó képeket csinál, videókban pedig példásan teljesít. Az  Apple ugyanis jelenleg az egyetlen gyártó, amelynek terméke Ultra HD felvételeket tud készíteni 60 FPS mellett. A készülék test/kijelző aránya is kellemes, és az iPhone X nem olyan nagydarab, mint az iPhone 8 Plus, viszont így is nehéz. Egyébként, minden tudást megkapunk, amit egy modern csúcs okostelefontól várhatunk. A háttértár még mindig nem bővíthető, de ez nem meglepő. Ráadásul egyre több Android-os telefonból marad el a microSD slot. Az üzemidő talán az a terület, ahol a legtöbbet lehetne javítani a készüléken. Egy napot ki lehet vele húzni, de nem sok "lötyögésünk" marad. Az iPhone X ilyen téren az összehasonlítás során az utolsó helyre került. A Huawei Mate 10 Pro például sokkal jobban teljesít ebben.

Végül pedig itt az ár kérdése. Az iPhone X 1149 eurós ($999), ártól kapható, és a 256 GB-os változathoz már 1319 eurót ($1149) kell letennünk a pultra. Összehasonlításképp: az Apple az alap iPhone 8-at 799 eurós ($699), a 8 Plus-t pedig 909 eurós ($799) áron kínálja. Azaz, az Apple az új design és a Face ID miatt elég komoly plusz pénzt kér el, de ezek a dolgok egyáltalán nem indokolják a váltást egy iPhone 8-ról, vagy akár 7-ről sem.

Ez az eredeti értékelés rövidített változata. A teljes, angol nyelvű cikk itt olvasható.

Apple iPhone X - 11/22/2017 v6
Patrick Afschar, Klaus Hinum, Andreas Osthoff, Daniel Schmidt

Váz
92%
Billentyűzet
72 / 75 → 96%
Érintőpad
93%
Csatlakoztathatóság
44 / 60 → 73%
Súly
90%
Akkumulátor
92%
Kijelző
92%
Játékok alatti teljesítmény
68 / 63 → 100%
Alkalmazások alatti teljesítmény
78 / 70 → 100%
Hőmérséklet
84%
Zaj
100%
Audio
65 / 91 → 71%
Camera
89%
Átlag
81%
90%
Smartphone - Súlyozott átlag

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Magyarország - Kezdőlap > Tesztek / áttekintők > Apple iPhone X Smartphone rövid értékelés
Patrick Afschar, Klaus Hinum, Andreas Osthoff, Daniel Schmidt, 2017-11-28 (Update: 2017-11-28)