DXOMARK https://www.dxomark.com The leading source of independent audio, display, battery and image quality measurements and ratings for smartphone, camera, lens and wireless speaker since 2008. Thu, 15 Dec 2022 11:14:48 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.6.8 https://www.dxomark.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/logo-o-transparent-150x150.png DXOMARK https://www.dxomark.com 32 32 OnePlus 10T 5G Audio test https://www.dxomark.com/oneplus-10t-5g-audio-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/oneplus-10t-5g-audio-test/#respond Thu, 15 Dec 2022 11:14:48 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=135176 We put the OnePlus 10T 5G through our rigorous DXOMARK Audio test suite to measure its performance both at recording sound using its built-in microphones, and at playing audio back through its speakers. In this review, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases. Overview Key [...]

The post OnePlus 10T 5G Audio test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
We put the OnePlus 10T 5G through our rigorous DXOMARK Audio test suite to measure its performance both at recording sound using its built-in microphones, and at playing audio back through its speakers.

In this review, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview


Key audio specifications include:

  • Two stereo speakers
  • No jack audio output
  • Noise cancellation

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.


OnePlus 10T 5G
126
audio
124
playback
114

158

119

149

129

162

135

162

150

157

130
recording
117

147

118

146

93

157

128

170

132

145

130

166

Playback

Pros

  • Free of artifacts
  • Decent dynamics performance
  • Good volume performance

Cons

  • Midrange-centric tonal balance and poor timbre overall
  • Lack of low-end extension impairs bass precision and tonal balance

Recording

Pros

  • Good tonal balance in most recordings
  • Overall good intelligibility of recorded vocal content
  • Good wind noise reduction

Cons

  • Inconsistent recording quality; better for main camera video than selfie video and memo recording
  • Memo recordings in mono

In our DXOMARK Audio tests, the OnePlus 10T 5G proved to be a good device for audio recording, mainly thanks to the excellent intelligibility of vocal content, even when recording in strong winds. Overall, recording quality could have been more consistent, though, with a noticeably better main camera performance than for the front camera or memo apps.

In playback, the phone delivered a decent dynamics performance, and sound was pretty much free of artifacts. However, a lack of low- and high-end extension resulted in a dull sonority. Overall, better options for audio playback are available in the 10T 5G’s price bracket.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Audio tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone audio reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective tests and undertake more than 20 hours of perceptual evaluation under controlled lab conditions.
(For more details about our Playback protocol, click here; for more details about our Recording protocol, click here.)

The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations under the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

[glossary_exclude]Playback[/glossary_exclude]

124

OnePlus 10T 5G

163

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
How Audio Playback score is composed

DXOMARK engineers test playback through the smartphone speakers, whose performance is evaluated in our labs and in real-life conditions, using default apps and settings.

In playback testing, the OnePlus 10T 5G delivered an average timbre performance, without any major flaws, but the midrange-focused tonal balance lacked bass and high-end extension. Dynamics performance was decent overall, thanks to a fairly precise attack that allowed for accurate restitution of transients. Sharpness, bass precision, and punch all left some room for improvement, though.

The sound scene was narrow, and imprecise localizability made it hard to pinpoint individual elements in the audio field, making for an overall poor spatial performance in playback. Distance and depth rendering were inaccurate as well, but balance was good, with centered elements perceived at the center of the scene.

The OnePlus did well for volume, thanks to good intelligibility of content at the minimum volume setting and good loudness at maximum. Remarkably, the 10T 5G’s audio playback was also free of any kind of unwanted audio artifacts.

Listen to the tested smartphone’s playback performance in this comparison with some of its competitors:

OnePlus 10T 5g
Xiaomi 12T Pro
Apple iPhone 14
Recordings of the smartphones playing some of our music tracks at 60 LAeq in an anechoic environment by 2 microphones in A-B configuration, at 30 cm

Here is how the OnePlus 10T 5G performed in playback use cases compared to its competitors:

[glossary_exclude]Playback use-cases scores[/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Timbre[/glossary_exclude]

114

OnePlus 10T 5G

158

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The Timbre score represents how well a phone reproduces sound across the audible tonal range and takes into account bass, midrange, treble, tonal balance, and volume dependency. It is the most important attribute for playback.

[glossary_exclude]Music playback frequency response[/glossary_exclude]
A 1/12 octave frequency response graph, which measures the volume of each frequency emitted by the smartphone when playing a pure-sine wave in an anechoic environment.

[glossary_exclude]Dynamics[/glossary_exclude]

119

OnePlus 10T 5G

149

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The Dynamics score measures the accuracy of changes in the energy level of sound sources, for example how precisely a bass note is reproduced or the impact sound from drums.


[glossary_exclude]Spatial[/glossary_exclude]

129

OnePlus 10T 5G

162

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The sub-attributes for spatial tests include pinpointing a specific sound's location, its positional balance, distance, and wideness.


[glossary_exclude]Volume[/glossary_exclude]

135

OnePlus 10T 5G

162

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The Volume score represents the overall loudness of a smartphone and how smoothly volume increases and decreases based on user input.

Here are a few sound pressure levels (SPL) measured when playing our sample recordings of hip-hop and classical music at maximum volume:
Hip-Hop Classical
OnePlus 10T 5G 76.4 dBA 73 dBA
Xiaomi 12T Pro 74.1 dBA 69.8 dBA
Apple iPhone 14 74.8 dBA 71.9 dBA
The following graph shows the gradual changes in volume going from minimum to maximum. We expect these changes to be consistent across the range, so that all volume steps correspond to users’ expectations:
[glossary_exclude]Music volume consistency[/glossary_exclude]
This line graph shows the relative loudness of playback relative to the user selected volume step, measured at different volume steps with a correlated pink noise in an anechoic box recorded in axis at 0.20 meter.

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

150

OnePlus 10T 5G

157

[glossary_exclude]Asus ROG Phone 5[/glossary_exclude]

The Artifacts score measures the extent to which the sound is affected by various types of distortion. The higher the score, the less the disturbances in the sound are noticeable. Distortion can occur because of sound processing in the device and because of the quality of the speakers.

[glossary_exclude]Playback Total Harmonic Distortion (Maximum Volume)[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the Total Harmonic Distortion and Noise over the hearable frequency range.
It represents the distortion and noise of the device playing our test signal (0 dB Fs, Sweep Sine in an anechoic box at 40 cm) at the device's maximum volume.

[glossary_exclude]Recording[/glossary_exclude]

130

OnePlus 10T 5G

157

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
How Audio Recording score is composed

DXOMARK engineers test recording by evaluating the recorded files on reference audio equipment. Those recordings are done in our labs and in real-life conditions, using default apps and settings.

The OnePlus 10T 5G did better as a recording device than it did for payback. This said, timbre performance varied a lot with the use case. Treble was clean and open in main camera recordings, but recordings sounded much more muffled with the memo app. When recording concerts or other loud content, an excess of high-midrange resulted in a slight aggressiveness.

Dynamics were average for recording with both the main and front cameras, but the background was slightly too loud in recordings with the memo app. In main camera recordings, individual sound sources were easy to pinpoint and distance rendition was correct. The sound scene could have been wider, though, and it was reduced even further when recording in portrait orientation with the front camera. Memo recordings are in mono by default.

Loudness was great for both main and front camera recordings but dropped considerably with the memo app. In terms of artifacts, some distortion was noticeable with sudden loud noises and at high sound pressure levels. Overall, with vocal content at a nominal volume level, recordings were quite clean, though. The same was true for the background which in addition featured a pretty good tonal balance.

Here is how the OnePlus 10T 5G performed in recording use cases compared to its competitors:

[glossary_exclude]Recording use-cases scores[/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Timbre[/glossary_exclude]

117

OnePlus 10T 5G

147

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic3 Pro+[/glossary_exclude]

The Timbre score represents how well a phone captures sounds across the audible tonal range and takes into account bass, midrange, treble, and tonal balance. It is the most important attribute for recording.

[glossary_exclude]Life video frequency response[/glossary_exclude]
A 1/12 octave frequency response graph, which measures the volume of each frequency captured by the smartphone when recording a pure-sine wave in an anechoic environment.

[glossary_exclude]Dynamics[/glossary_exclude]

118

OnePlus 10T 5G

146

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The Dynamics score measures the accuracy of changes in the energy level of sound sources, for example how precisely a voice's plosives (the p's, t's and k's, for example) are reproduced. The score also considers the Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR), for example how loud the main voice is compared to the background noise.


[glossary_exclude]Spatial[/glossary_exclude]

93

OnePlus 10T 5G

157

[glossary_exclude]Asus ROG Phone 5[/glossary_exclude]

The sub-attributes for spatial tests include pinpointing a specific sound's location, its positional balance, distance, and wideness on the recorded audio files.

[glossary_exclude]Recording directivity[/glossary_exclude]
Directivity graph of the smartphone when recording test signals using the camera app, with the main camera. It represents the acoustic energy (in dB) over the angle of incidence of the sound source. (Normalized to the angle 0°, in front of the device.)

[glossary_exclude]Volume[/glossary_exclude]

128

OnePlus 10T 5G

170

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The Volume score represents how loud audio is normalized on the recorded files and the how the device handles loud environments, such as electronic concerts, when recording.

Here are the sound levels recorded in the audio and video files, measured in LUFS (Loudness Unit Full Scale); as a reference, we expect loudness levels to be above -24 LUFS for recorded content:
Meeting Life Video Selfie Video Memo
OnePlus 10T 5G -25.5 LUFS -17.9 LUFS -16.4 LUFS -18.7 LUFS
Xiaomi 12T Pro -30.3 LUFS -21.8 LUFS -20.2 LUFS -25.3 LUFS
Apple iPhone 14 -23.8 LUFS -22.5 LUFS -20.5 LUFS -18.7 LUFS

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

132

OnePlus 10T 5G

145

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The Artifacts score measures the extent to which the recorded sounds are affected by various types of distortions. The higher the score, the less the disturbances in the sound are noticeable. Distortions can occur because of sound processing in the device and the quality of the microphones, as well as user handling, such as how the phone is held.

In this audio comparison, you can listen to the way this smartphone handles wind noise relative to its competitors:

Recordings of a voice sample with light background noise, facing a turbulent wind of 5 m/s

[glossary_exclude]Background[/glossary_exclude]

130

OnePlus 10T 5G

166

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Background evaluates how natural the various sounds around a voice blend into the video recording file. For example, when recording a speech at an event, the background should not interfere with the main voice, yet it should provide some context of the surroundings.

The post OnePlus 10T 5G Audio test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/oneplus-10t-5g-audio-test/feed/ 0 AUDIO AUDIO
Huawei Mate 50 Pro Selfie test https://www.dxomark.com/huawei-mate-50-pro-selfie-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/huawei-mate-50-pro-selfie-test/#respond Wed, 14 Dec 2022 09:00:03 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=134205&preview=true&preview_id=134205 We put the Huawei Mate 50 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Selfie test suite to measure its performance in photo and video from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our [...]

The post Huawei Mate 50 Pro Selfie test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
We put the Huawei Mate 50 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Selfie test suite to measure its performance in photo and video from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key front camera specifications:

  • 13MP sensor
  • f/2.4-aperture lens
  • up to 4K video
  • 3D Depth Sensing Camera

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.


Huawei Mate 50 Pro
145
selfie
147
photo
92

Best

97

105

100

Best

75

79

94

Best

80

89

93

Best

65

80

143
video
82

86

85

90

90

92

75

97

72

83

74

92

77

82

Pros

  • Nice skin tones in photos
  • Good exposure and wide dynamic range in photos and videos
  • Good detail and very low noise levels
  • Subjects always in focus, even in group shots
  • Video noise well under control in bright light and indoors
  • Accurate white balance and nice colors
  • Wide depth of field in videos

Cons

  • Local loss of texture is visible in some conditions, especially in low-light images
  • Occasionally desaturated skin tones visible in backlit scenes
  • Artifacts such as color quantization and local loss of facial texture in photos
  • Coarse noise and lack of detail in low-light videos
  • Occasionally low contrast in videos
  • Slightly inaccurate skin tones in some conditions
  • Video artifacts, including local movement of texture, color quantization, and ghosting

With a DXOMARK Selfie score of 145, the Huawei Mate 50 Pro reaches the No. 1 spot in our front camera ranking. Except for the device’s fixed-focus front camera, the Mate 50 Pro comes with most of the same hardware specifications as the Huawei P50 Pro. Despite the hardware similarities, the Mate 50 Pro’s performance was an improvement over the P50 Pro thanks to new software solutions and refined tuning,

For video, the Mate 50 Pro was tested at 4K resolution at 30 frames per second, with Vivid HDR mode enabled. Vivid HDR is a new HDR video format and currently supported by a range of phones and TVs. In our tests the Mate 50 Pro delivered a very consistent still image performance, achieving top scores in several test categories, including exposure, focus, noise and flash. This said, overall the Huawei Mate 50 Pro video results were good but not outstanding, mainly due to slightly low contrast levels and a low light performance that left some room for improvement.

Accurate target exposure and wide dynamic range, nice colors, and good detail

Test summary

About DXOMARK Selfie tests: For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 1,500 test images both in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the front camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the user’s needs and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as close-up and group selfies. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 1 to 1,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K. For more information about the DXOMARK Selfie test protocol, click here. More details on how we score smartphone cameras are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses .Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us on how to receive a full report.

[glossary_exclude]Huawei Mate 50 Pro Selfie Scores vs Ultra-Premium[/glossary_exclude]
This graph compares overall photo and video DXOMARK Selfie scores between tested devices and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices.

[glossary_exclude]Photo[/glossary_exclude]

147

Huawei Mate 50 Pro

Best

[glossary_exclude][/glossary_exclude]
[glossary_exclude]Huawei Mate 50 Pro Photo scores vs Ultra-Premium[/glossary_exclude]
The photo tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. The range of focus and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses.

When shooting still images, the Huawei Mate 50 Pro delivered very solid results across almost all test categories. Target exposure was accurate, with a wider dynamic range than the competition. Images showed nice colors, but our testers observed a slight green cast in overcast conditions and slightly desaturated skin tones in scenes with strong backlighting. A wide depth of field meant all subjects tended to be in focus in group shots. In addition, the Huawei did very well in terms of texture/noise, rendering very fine detail nicely and limiting noise in most conditions. This said, texture rendering was occasionally somewhat unstable across consecutive shots, mainly in difficult low-light scenes.

[glossary_exclude]Exposure[/glossary_exclude]

92

Huawei Mate 50 Pro

Best

[glossary_exclude][/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Color[/glossary_exclude]

97

Huawei Mate 50 Pro

105

[glossary_exclude]Google Pixel 7 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Exposure and color are the key attributes for technically good pictures. For exposure, the main attribute evaluated is the brightness of the face(s) in various use cases and light conditions. Other factors evaluated are the contrast and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting consecutive images in a row.
For color, the image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability.

Huawei Mate 50 Pro – wide dynamic range, slightly bright face exposure, desaturated skin tones
Apple iPhone 14 Pro – limited dynamic range, slightly dark face exposure, slightly inaccurate skin tones
Google Pixel 7 Pro – limited dynamic range, good face exposure, slightly inaccurate skin tones

[glossary_exclude]Focus[/glossary_exclude]

100

Huawei Mate 50 Pro

Best

[glossary_exclude][/glossary_exclude]

Autofocus tests evaluate the accuracy of the focus on the subject’s face, the repeatability of an accurate focus, and the depth of field. While a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single-subject selfie or close-up shot, it can be problematic in specific conditions such as group selfies; both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from 30cm to 150cm, and in low light to outdoor conditions.

Huawei Mate 50 Pro - group selfie
Huawei Mate 50 Pro - wide depth of field, background subjects in focus
Apple iPhone 14 Pro - group selfie
Apple iPhone 14 Pro - limited depth of field, background out of focus
Google Pixel 7 Pro - group selfie
Google Pixel 7 Pro - limited depth of field, background subjects out of focus

[glossary_exclude]Texture[/glossary_exclude]

75

Huawei Mate 50 Pro

79

[glossary_exclude]Asus ZenFone 7 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in facial features, such as the eyes. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC) and the Dead Leaves chart.

[glossary_exclude]Texture acutance evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of texture acutance with the level of lux for two holding conditions. The texture acutance is measured on the Dead Leaves chart in the Close-up Dead Leaves setup.

[glossary_exclude]Noise[/glossary_exclude]

94

Huawei Mate 50 Pro

Best

[glossary_exclude][/glossary_exclude]

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, and structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the DXOMARK Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

[glossary_exclude]Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the Close-up Dead Leaves setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

80

Huawei Mate 50 Pro

89

[glossary_exclude]Google Pixel 7 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The artifacts evaluation looks at lens shading, chromatic aberrations, distortion measurement on the Dot chart and MTF, and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab. Particular attention is paid to ghosting, quantization, halos, and hue shifts on the face among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

[glossary_exclude]Main photo artifacts penalties[/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Bokeh[/glossary_exclude]

65

Huawei Mate 50 Pro

80

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Bokeh is tested in one dedicated mode, usually portrait or aperture mode, and analyzed by visually inspecting all the images captured in the lab and in natural conditions. The goal is to reproduce portrait photography comparable to one taken with a DSLR and a wide aperture. The main image quality attributes paid attention to are depth estimation, artifacts, blur gradient, and the shape of the bokeh blur spotlights. Portrait image quality attributes (exposure, color, texture) are also taken into account.

Slightly inaccurate subject isolation, no blur gradient

[glossary_exclude]Video[/glossary_exclude]

143

Huawei Mate 50 Pro

154

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Selfie Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the front camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 1 to 1000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

[glossary_exclude]Huawei Mate 50 Pro Video scores vs Ultra-Premium[/glossary_exclude]
Video tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, smoothness, and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.

In video mode, the Mate 50 Pro front camera shone especially in terms of exposure, dynamic range and white balance. Overall, the device delivered a pleasant video experience but left some opportunities for improvements. Contrast was sometimes not perfectly adjusted and our testers noticed frequent exposure instabilities, especially in strongly backlit scenes. In such difficult conditions, we also noticed slightly inaccurate skin tone rendering. The level of captured detail was high on faces, and noise was kept well under control both in bright light and under indoor conditions. However, noise was quite noticeable in low light. Video stabilization was quite effective, but frame shifts were often visible when panning the camera.

[glossary_exclude]Exposure[/glossary_exclude]

82

Huawei Mate 50 Pro

86

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Color[/glossary_exclude]

85

Huawei Mate 50 Pro

90

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness of the face and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed. Image-quality color analysis looks at skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

 

Huawei Mate 50 Pro – wide dynamic range, exposure instabilities

Apple iPhone 14 Pro – wide dynamic range, nice contrast, stable exposure

Huawei P50 Pro – limited dynamic range, slightly inaccurate color

[glossary_exclude]Texture[/glossary_exclude]

75

Huawei Mate 50 Pro

97

[glossary_exclude]Asus ZenFone 6[/glossary_exclude]

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural video recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of detail on the facial features. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart.

[glossary_exclude]Texture acutance evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of texture acutance with the level of lux for two holding conditions. The texture acutance is measured on the Dead Leaves chart in the Close-up Dead Leaves setup.

[glossary_exclude]Noise[/glossary_exclude]

72

Huawei Mate 50 Pro

83

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra[/glossary_exclude]

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise on faces. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

[glossary_exclude]Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
[glossary_exclude]Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

[glossary_exclude]Stabilization[/glossary_exclude]

77

Huawei Mate 50 Pro

82

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at overall residual motion on the face and the background, smoothness and jellow artifacts, during walk and paning use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

Huawei Mate 50 Pro – effective compensation of walking motion, frequent frame shift

Apple iPhone 14 Pro – effective compensation of walking motion

Huawei P50 Pro – effective compensation of walking motion

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

74

Huawei Mate 50 Pro

92

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 12 mini[/glossary_exclude]

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as quantization, hue shift, and face-rendering artifacts among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below

[glossary_exclude]Main video artifacts penalties[/glossary_exclude]

The post Huawei Mate 50 Pro Selfie test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/huawei-mate-50-pro-selfie-test/feed/ 0 Best Best Best Best SELFIE SELFIE IenaBridge_HuaweiMate50Pro_DxOMark_Selfie Best Best BacklitDuofieFairDeep_HuaweiMate50Pro_DxOMark_Selfie BacklitDuofieFairDeep_AppleiPhone14Pro_DxOMark_Selfie BacklitDuofieFairDeep_GooglePixel7Pro_DxOMark_Selfie Best Best Street_HuaweiMate50Pro_DxOMark_Selfie
Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-12-lite-5g-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-12-lite-5g-camera-test/#respond Tue, 13 Dec 2022 14:07:57 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=134839&preview=true&preview_id=134839 We put the Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results [...]

The post Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
We put the Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 108 MP 1/1.52″ sensor
  • Ultra-wide: 8 MP, f/2.2, FOV 120°
  • Macro: 2 MP, f/2.4

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.


Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G
109
camera
111
photo
104

117

102

119

92

116

83

114

83

115

71

81

40
bokeh
40

80

66
preview
66

91

72
zoom
37

116

95

117

121
video
90

115

103

117

80

117

110

115

105

118

79

86

107

117

Use cases & Conditions

[glossary_exclude]Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.[/glossary_exclude]

BEST 165

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 151

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 122

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 142

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Pros

  • Accurate target exposure in most conditions in photo, with smooth transitions in video
  • Pleasant white balance and color rendering in most conditions
  • Accurate color rendering in video in outdoor and indoor conditions

Cons

  • Occasionally autofocusing on wrong target, with a shallow depth of field
  • Visible noise in low-light conditions in photo and video
  • Low level of details in low-light conditions, with visible motion blur
  • Occasional ghosting, ringing, and color quantization
  • In bokeh, visible depth artifacts, with unnatural blur gradient
  • Narrow dynamic range for low-light conditions in video
  • Visible sharpness differences between video frames in all conditions

The Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G is the most basic model available in the 12-series. While its rear-camera setup looks just like the others in the series, featuring three modules — primary, ultra-wide, and macro – the 12 Lite 5G’s camera modules actually use different sensors, which mainly account for the differences in image quality.

Overall, the device behaved well in good lighting conditions. Target exposure and color rendering were pleasant in outdoor situations in both photo and video, but image details were quite low. Indoors, and especially in low-light conditions, however, image noise was often visible with some artifacts.

For its price, which is about half of the top-end model in the series, the 12 Lite 5G’s camera performance was quite average overall, even when judging it against other devices in its High-end segment ($400 to $599). The lack of a tele module and a limited ultrawide module, compared with other devices in the segment,  hampered the device’s performance.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s Camera evaluations take place in laboratories and in real-world situations using a wide variety of subjects. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly by measurement software on our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests in which a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo, Zoom, and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an Overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G Camera Scores[/glossary_exclude]
This graph compares DXOMARK photo, zoom and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

[glossary_exclude]Photo[/glossary_exclude]

111

Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G

152

[glossary_exclude]Huawei Mate 50 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2,600 test images both in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, family, and landscape photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 1 to 1,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G Photo scores[/glossary_exclude]
The photo tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses.
Xiaomi 12 Lite – Accurate target exposure with pleasant color rendering.
[glossary_exclude]Autofocus irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ0EV Daylight Handheld[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed and also zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 1000Lux with Daylight illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
[glossary_exclude]Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

[glossary_exclude]Zoom[/glossary_exclude]

72

Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G

151

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic4 Ultimate[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate over 400 test images in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor, and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings and pinch zoom at various zoom factors from ultra wide to very long-range zoom. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting the images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements of chart mages captured in the lab under different conditions from 20 to 1000 lux and color temperatures from 2300K to 6500K.

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G Zoom Scores[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length. Zooming-in scores are displayed on the right and Zooming-out scores on the left.

[glossary_exclude]Video[/glossary_exclude]

121

Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G

149

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2.5 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 1 to 1000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G Video scores[/glossary_exclude]
Video tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.

Xiaomi 12 Lite – Accurate target exposure with pleasant color rendering.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
[glossary_exclude]Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
[glossary_exclude]Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

The post Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-12-lite-5g-camera-test/feed/ 0 Amadeus_Xiaomi12Lite5G
Apple iPhone 14 Plus Display test https://www.dxomark.com/apple-iphone-14-plus-display-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/apple-iphone-14-plus-display-test/#respond Thu, 08 Dec 2022 12:37:22 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=134993 Apart from a larger screen, the Apple iPhone 14 Plus and iPhone 14  share many of the same specs, including the same A15 Bionic processor. We tested the iPhone 14 Plus display, and as expected, the results were mostly the same as those for iPhone 14. Any resulting score differences were within our margin of [...]

The post Apple iPhone 14 Plus Display test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
Apart from a larger screen, the Apple iPhone 14 Plus and iPhone 14  share many of the same specs, including the same A15 Bionic processor. We tested the iPhone 14 Plus display, and as expected, the results were mostly the same as those for iPhone 14. Any resulting score differences were within our margin of error.

For a more detailed look at the iPhone 14 Plus’s display performance, please see the test results of the Apple iPhone 14.

Overview

Key display specifications:

  • 6.7 inches OLED, (~86.9% screen-to-body ratio)
  • Dimensions: 160.8 x 78.1 x 7.8 mm (6.33 x 3.07 x 0.31 inches)
  • Resolution: 1284 x 2778 pixels, (~458 ppi density)
  • Refresh rate: 60 Hz

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Apple iPhone 14 Plus
140
display
135

160

143

163

151

162

150

155

130

165

139

149

Pros

  • Readable screen in indoor conditions
  • Good contrast and proper brightness when watching HDR10 video
  • No frame drops when watching videos

Cons

  • Lack of smoothness when scrolling
  • Yellow cast on most content
  • Low brightness in low-light conditions

 

The post Apple iPhone 14 Plus Display test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/apple-iphone-14-plus-display-test/feed/ 0 DISPLAY DISPLAY
Apple iPhone 14 Plus Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/apple-iphone-14-plus-camera-test-results/ https://www.dxomark.com/apple-iphone-14-plus-camera-test-results/#respond Thu, 08 Dec 2022 12:36:55 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=134822&preview=true&preview_id=134822 The Apple iPhone 14 Plus and iPhone 14 share the same rear camera specs, as well the same chipset, so as expected, the results of the Apple iPhone 14 Plus camera were exactly the same as those of the Apple iPhone 14. For a more in-depth look at the Apple iPhone 14 Plus’s rear camera [...]

The post Apple iPhone 14 Plus Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
The Apple iPhone 14 Plus and iPhone 14 share the same rear camera specs, as well the same chipset, so as expected, the results of the Apple iPhone 14 Plus camera were exactly the same as those of the Apple iPhone 14.

For a more in-depth look at the Apple iPhone 14 Plus’s rear camera photo and video performance, we direct you to the full test results of the Apple iPhone 14.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 12MP 1/1.9-inch sensor, 24mm equivalent f/1.5-aperture lens, Dual PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 12MP sensor, 24mm equivalent f/2.4-aperture lens, PDAF

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.


Apple iPhone 14 Plus
133
camera
135
photo
110

117

116

119

110

116

103

114

80

115

71

81

70
bokeh
70

80

85
preview
85

91

90
zoom
60

116

88

117

146
video
114

115

116

117

115

117

109

115

116

118

73

86

116

117

Use cases & Conditions

[glossary_exclude]Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.[/glossary_exclude]

BEST 165

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 151

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 122

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 142

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Pros

  • Good exposure and nice color
  • Fast and accurate autofocus
  • Realistic bokeh effect in portrait mode
  • Preview image close to capture
  • Good video exposure and fairly wide dynamic range
  • Very effective video stabilization, even with intense camera motion
  • Good texture/noise trade-off in video
  • Smooth video autofocus with fast convergence

Cons

  • Luminance noise in low light, especially in areas of plain color
  • Highlight clipping in strongly backlit scenes
  • Artifacts, including ghosting, ringing and hue shift
  • No macro mode
  • Orange white balance casts in low-light video
  • Occasional video exposure instabilities and slow exposure adaptation
  • Lens flare, ringing, and color quantization in video, especially in low light
  • Noise on moving elements in the scene in low light video

 

Apple iPhone 14 Plus
Apple iPhone 14

The post Apple iPhone 14 Plus Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/apple-iphone-14-plus-camera-test-results/feed/ 0 CAMERA CAMERA ArtOnTablet_AppleiPhone14Plus_DxOMark_05-00 ArtOnTablet_AppleiPhone14_DxOMark_05-00
Asus ROG Phone 6 Display test https://www.dxomark.com/asus-rog-phone-6-display-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/asus-rog-phone-6-display-test/#respond Wed, 07 Dec 2022 16:19:26 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=134685&preview=true&preview_id=134685 We put the Asus ROG Phone 6 through our rigorous DXOMARK Display test suite to measure its performance across six criteria. In this results summary, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases. Overview Key display specifications: 6.78-inch AMOLED (~83.4% screen-to-body ratio) Dimensions: 173.0 x 77.0 [...]

The post Asus ROG Phone 6 Display test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
We put the Asus ROG Phone 6 through our rigorous DXOMARK Display test suite to measure its performance across six criteria. In this results summary, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview

Key display specifications:

  • 6.78-inch AMOLED (~83.4% screen-to-body ratio)
  • Dimensions: 173.0 x 77.0 x 10.4 mm (6.81 x 3.03 x 0.41 inches)
  • Resolution: 1080 x 2448 pixels, (~395 ppi density)
  • Aspect ratio: 20.4:9
  • Refresh rate: 165 Hz

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Asus ROG Phone 6
128
display
116

160

141

163

134

162

136

155

156

165

115

149

Pros

  • Uniform in brightness and color
  • Well-managed brightness and colors for HDR10 videos
  • Accurate and very responsive to touch when playing video games

Cons

  • No high brightness mode
  • Slow falling light transitions with visible steps
  • Ghost touches when playing video games, especially in landscape mode

The Asus ROG Phone 6 is quite a good device, with a display that is uniform in brightness and color. In addition, HDR10 videos are pleasant to watch, thanks to good management of brightness and contrast. The gaming experience is globally good, as the device is accurate and responds quickly to touch when playing video games. However, its lack of high brightness mode means that the ROG Phone 6 is hard to read under sunlight; further, its transitions are slow and show steps as it adapts to falling light transitions.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Display tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone and other display reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective and perceptual tests under controlled lab and real-life conditions. Note that we evaluate display attributes using only the device’s built-in display hardware and its still image (gallery) and video apps at their default settings. (For in-depth information about how we evaluate smartphone and other displays, check out our articles, “How DXOMARK tests display quality” and “A closer look at DXOMARK Display testing.

The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations under the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

[glossary_exclude]Readability[/glossary_exclude]

116

Asus ROG Phone 6

160

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]
How Display Readability score is composed

Readability evaluates how easily and comfortably users can read still content (photos & web) on the display under different real-life conditions. DXOMARK uses its Display Bench to recreate ambient light conditions ranging from total darkness to bright sunlight. In addition to laboratory tests, perceptual analysis is also made in real-life environments.

Brightness under various lighting conditions
Contrast under various lighting conditions


Readability in an indoor (1000 lux) environment
From left to right: Asus ROG Phone 6, Asus ROG Phone 5, Poco F4 GT, Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
(Photos for illustration only)


Readability in a sunlight (>90 0000 lux) environment
From left to right: Asus ROG Phone 6, Asus ROG Phone 5, Poco F4 GT, Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
(Photos for illustration only)

Luminance uniformity measurement
This graph shows the uniformity of the display with a 20% gray pattern. The more visible the green color, the more uniform the display.

[glossary_exclude]Color[/glossary_exclude]

141

Asus ROG Phone 6

163

[glossary_exclude]Sony Xperia 5 IV[/glossary_exclude]
How Display Color score is composed

The color attribute evaluates the capacity of the device to accurately reproduce colors. The measurements taken are for fidelity, white point color, and gamut coverage. We perform color evaluations for different lighting conditions to see how well the device can manage color in the surrounding environment. Colors are measured using a spectrophotometer in a controlled lighting environment. Perceptual analysis of color rendering is against the reference pattern displayed on a calibrated professional monitor.

White point under D65 illuminant at 1000 lux

Color fidelity measurements
Asus ROG Phone 6, color fidelity at 1000 lux in the sRGB color space
Asus ROG Phone 6, color fidelity at 1000 lux in the Display-P3 color space
Each arrow represents the color difference between a target color pattern (base of the arrow) and its actual measurement (tip of the arrow). The longer the arrow, the more visible the color difference is. If the arrow stays within the circle, the color difference will be visible only to trained eyes.
Color behavior on angle
This graph shows the color shift when the screen is at an angle. Each dot represents a measurement at a particular angle. Dots inside the inner circle exhibit no color shift in angle; those between the inner and outer circle have shifts that only trained experts will see; but those falling outside the outer circle are noticeable.

[glossary_exclude]Video[/glossary_exclude]

134

Asus ROG Phone 6

162

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)[/glossary_exclude]
How Display Video score is composed

Our video attribute evaluates the Standard Dynamic Range (SDR) and High Dynamic Range (HDR10) video handling of each device in indoor and low-light conditions. We measure tone mapping, color gamut, brightness and contrast of the display. We perform perceptual analysis against our professional reference monitor (Sony BVM-HX310) to ensure that the rendering respects the artistic intent.

Video brightness at 10% APL in the dark ( < 5 lux)


Video rendering in a low-light (0 lux) environment
Clockwise from top left: Asus ROG Phone 6, Asus ROG Phone 5, Poco F4 GT, Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)
(Photos for illustration only)

Gamut coverage for video content
HDR10 Gamut coverage
SDR Gamut coverage
The primary colors are measured both in HDR10 and SDR. The extracted color gamut shows the extent of the color area that the device can render. To respect the artistic intent, the measured gamut should match the master color space of each video.

The HDR10 gamut measurements were done using 80% red, green, and blue test patterns. Indeed, a strong desaturation was measured when using our usual 100% red, green and blue patterns leading to a strongly reduced gamut.

This photo shows the HDR10 color levels of the Asus ROG Phone 6 being desaturated past 80%.

[glossary_exclude]Motion[/glossary_exclude]

136

Asus ROG Phone 6

155

[glossary_exclude]Huawei P40 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
How Display Motion score is composed

The motion attribute evaluates the handling of dynamic contents. Frame drops, motion blur, and playback artifacts are scrutinized using games and videos.


Video frame drops
30 fps content
60 fps content
These long exposure photos present the number of frame irregularities in a 30-second video. A good performance shows a regular pattern (either a flat gray image or a pull-down pattern).

[glossary_exclude]Touch[/glossary_exclude]

156

Asus ROG Phone 6

165

[glossary_exclude]OnePlus 9[/glossary_exclude]
How Display Touch score is composed

To evaluate touch, DXOMARK uses a touch robot and a high-speed camera to play and record a set of scenarios for smoothness, accuracy and response-time evaluation.

Average Touch Response Time Asus ROG Phone 6
54 ms
Fast
Good
Bad
Slow
This response time test evaluates precisely the time elapsed between a single touch of the robot on the screen and the displayed action. This test is applied to activities that require a high reactivity, such as gaming.

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

115

Asus ROG Phone 6

149

[glossary_exclude]LG Wing[/glossary_exclude]
How Display Artifacts score is composed

Evaluating artifacts means checking for the performance, image rendering and motion flaws that can affect the end-user experience. DXOMARK measures precisely the device’s reflectance and the presence of flicker, and assesses the impact of residual aliasing when playing video games, among other characteristics.

Average Reflectance (SCI) Asus ROG Phone 6
5 %
Low
Good
Bad
High
Reflectance measurement (SCI)
Measurements above show the reflection of the device within the visible spectrum range (400 nm to 700 nm). It includes both diffuse and specular reflection.
Flicker Frequency Asus ROG Phone 6
480 Hz
Bad
Good
Bad
Great
Flicker comparison
This graph represents the frequencies of lighting variation; the highest peak gives the main flicker frequency.
Aliasing (closeup)
Asus ROG Phone 6
(Photos for illustration only)

Asus ROG Phone 6 – Crop 1
Asus ROG Phone 6 – Crop 2
Asus ROG Phone 6 – Crop 3

The post Asus ROG Phone 6 Display test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/asus-rog-phone-6-display-test/feed/ 0 DISPLAY DISPLAY AsusRogPhone6_readability_indoor AsusRogPhone6_readability_sunlight AsusRogPhone6_readability_uniformity AsusRogPhone6_White_Point_CCT_vs_Ambient AsusRogPhone6_Color_Fidelity_Still_sRGB_1000lux_Zoom AsusRogPhone6_Color_Fidelity_Still_P3_1000lux_Zoom AsusRogPhone6_Scatter_Cono_White_P3_Zoom AsusRogPhone6_video_lowlight_1 Gamut_Video_HDR10 AsusRogPhone6_Gamut_Video_SDR Gammacolor AsusRogPhone6_motion_framedrops_fps_1 AsusRogPhone6_motion_framedrops_fps_2 AsusRogPhone6_artifacts_aliasing_full AsusRogPhone6_artifacts_aliasing_crops_dut_1 AsusRogPhone6_artifacts_aliasing_crops_dut_2 AsusRogPhone6_artifacts_aliasing_crops_dut_3
Black Shark 5 Pro Display test https://www.dxomark.com/black-shark-5-pro-display-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/black-shark-5-pro-display-test/#respond Wed, 30 Nov 2022 12:08:20 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=134053&preview=true&preview_id=134053 We put the Black Shark 5 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Display test suite to measure its performance across six criteria. In this test results summary, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases. Overview Key display specifications: 6.67-inch OLED (~87.2% screen-to-body ratio) Dimensions: 163.9 x [...]

The post Black Shark 5 Pro Display test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
We put the Black Shark 5 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Display test suite to measure its performance across six criteria. In this test results summary, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview

Key display specifications:

  • 6.67-inch OLED (~87.2% screen-to-body ratio)
  • Dimensions: 163.9 x 76.5 x 9.5 mm (6.45 x 3.01 x 0.37 inches)
  • Resolution: 1080 x 2400 pixels (~394 ppi density)
  • Aspect ratio: 20:9
  • Refresh rate: 144 Hz

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Black Shark 5 Pro
94
display
74

160

120

163

88

162

130

155

108

165

115

149

Pros

  • No frame drops when playing video games
  • Satisfactory smoothness in every use case
  • Decent accuracy when playing video games

Cons

  • Not uniform in color and brightness
  • Poorly managed brightness and color for HDR10 videos
  • Lack of brightness and details under sunlight

The Black Shark 5 Pro’s best attribute is its smoothness, with good fluidity in every use case. This good control of motion teams up with good accuracy and an absence of frame drops to provide a good overall gaming experience. However, the device has below-average readability, especially under sunlight, and both its brightness and color are noticeably non-uniform across the screen. One of its weakest points is its handling of HDR10 videos, with poor brightness and a strongly visible green cast contributing to an unpleasant viewing experience.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Display tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone and other display reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective and perceptual tests under controlled lab and real-life conditions. Note that we evaluate display attributes using only the device’s built-in display hardware and its still image (gallery) and video apps at their default settings. (For in-depth information about how we evaluate smartphone and other displays, check out our articles, “How DXOMARK tests display quality” and “A closer look at DXOMARK Display testing.

The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations under the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

[glossary_exclude]Readability[/glossary_exclude]

74

Black Shark 5 Pro

160

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]
How Display Readability score is composed

Readability evaluates how easily and comfortably users can read still content (photos & web) on the display under different real-life conditions. DXOMARK uses its Display Bench to recreate ambient light conditions ranging from total darkness to bright sunlight. In addition to laboratory tests, perceptual analysis is also made in real-life environments.

Brightness under various lighting conditions
Contrast under various lighting conditions


Readability in an indoor (1000 lux) environment
From left to right: Black Shark 5 Pro, Black Shark 4 Pro, Realme GT 2 Pro, Xiaomi 12T Pro
(Photos for illustration only)


Readability in a sunlight (>90 0000 lux) environment
From left to right: Black Shark 5 Pro, Black Shark 4 Pro, Realme GT 2 Pro, Xiaomi 12T Pro
(Photos for illustration only)

Luminance uniformity measurement
This graph shows the uniformity of the display with a 20% gray pattern. The more visible the green color, the more uniform the display.

[glossary_exclude]Color[/glossary_exclude]

120

Black Shark 5 Pro

163

[glossary_exclude]Sony Xperia 5 IV[/glossary_exclude]
How Display Color score is composed

The color attribute evaluates the capacity of the device to accurately reproduce colors. The measurements taken are for fidelity, white point color, and gamut coverage. We perform color evaluations for different lighting conditions to see how well the device can manage color in the surrounding environment. Colors are measured using a spectrophotometer in a controlled lighting environment. Perceptual analysis of color rendering is against the reference pattern displayed on a calibrated professional monitor.

White point under D65 illuminant at 1000 lux

Color fidelity measurements
Black Shark 5 Pro , color fidelity at 1000 lux in the sRGB color space
Black Shark 5 Pro , color fidelity at 1000 lux in the Display-P3 color space
Each arrow represents the color difference between a target color pattern (base of the arrow) and its actual measurement (tip of the arrow). The longer the arrow, the more visible the color difference is. If the arrow stays within the circle, the color difference will be visible only to trained eyes.
Color behavior on angle
This graph shows the color shift when the screen is at an angle. Each dot represents a measurement at a particular angle. Dots inside the inner circle exhibit no color shift in angle; those between the inner and outer circle have shifts that only trained experts will see; but those falling outside the outer circle are noticeable.

[glossary_exclude]Video[/glossary_exclude]

88

Black Shark 5 Pro

162

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)[/glossary_exclude]
How Display Video score is composed

Our video attribute evaluates the Standard Dynamic Range (SDR) and High Dynamic Range (HDR10) video handling of each device in indoor and low-light conditions. We measure tone mapping, color gamut, brightness and contrast of the display. We perform perceptual analysis against our professional reference monitor (Sony BVM-HX310) to ensure that the rendering respects the artistic intent.

Video brightness at 10% APL in the dark ( < 5 lux)


Video rendering in a low-light (0 lux) environment
Clockwise from top left: Black Shark 5 Pro, Black Shark 4 Pro, Realme GT 2 Pro, Xiaomi 12T Pro
(Photos for illustration only)

Gamut coverage for video content
HDR10 Gamut coverage
SDR Gamut coverage
The primary colors are measured both in HDR10 and SDR. The extracted color gamut shows the extent of the color area that the device can render. To respect the artistic intent, the measured gamut should match the master color space of each video.

[glossary_exclude]Motion[/glossary_exclude]

130

Black Shark 5 Pro

155

[glossary_exclude]Huawei P40 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
How Display Motion score is composed

The motion attribute evaluates the handling of dynamic contents. Frame drops, motion blur, and playback artifacts are scrutinized using games and videos.


Video frame drops
30 fps content
60 fps content
These long exposure photos present the number of frame irregularities in a 30-second video. A good performance shows a regular pattern (either a flat gray image or a pull-down pattern).

[glossary_exclude]Touch[/glossary_exclude]

108

Black Shark 5 Pro

165

[glossary_exclude]OnePlus 9[/glossary_exclude]
How Display Touch score is composed

To evaluate touch, DXOMARK uses a touch robot and a high-speed camera to play and record a set of scenarios for smoothness, accuracy and response-time evaluation.

Average Touch Response Time Black Shark 5 Pro
116 ms
Fast
Good
Bad
Slow
This response time test evaluates precisely the time elapsed between a single touch of the robot on the screen and the displayed action. This test is applied to activities that require a high reactivity, such as gaming.

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

115

Black Shark 5 Pro

149

[glossary_exclude]LG Wing[/glossary_exclude]
How Display Artifacts score is composed

Evaluating artifacts means checking for the performance, image rendering and motion flaws that can affect the end-user experience. DXOMARK measures precisely the device’s reflectance and the presence of flicker, and assesses the impact of residual aliasing when playing video games, among other characteristics.

Average Reflectance (SCI) Black Shark 5 Pro
4.6 %
Low
Good
Bad
High
Reflectance measurement (SCI)
Measurements above show the reflection of the device within the visible spectrum range (400 nm to 700 nm). It includes both diffuse and specular reflection.
Flicker Frequency Black Shark 5 Pro
240 Hz
Bad
Good
Bad
Great
Flicker comparison
This graph represents the frequencies of lighting variation; the highest peak gives the main flicker frequency.
Aliasing (closeup)
Black Shark 5 Pro
(Photos for illustration only)

Black Shark 5 Pro – Crop1
Black Shark 5 Pro – Crop 2
Black Shark 5 Pro – Crop3

The post Black Shark 5 Pro Display test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/black-shark-5-pro-display-test/feed/ 0 DISPLAY DISPLAY Black_Shark_5_Pro_readability_indoor Black_Shark_5_Pro_readability_sunlight Black_Shark_5_Pro_readability_uniformity Black_Shark_5_Pro_White_Point_CCT_vs_Ambient Color_Fidelity_Still_sRGB_1000lux_Zoom Color_Fidelity_Still_P3_1000lux_Zoom Black_Shark_5_Pro_Scatter_Cono_White_P3_Zoom Black_Shark_5_Pro_video_lowlight_1 Black_Shark_5_Pro_Gamut_Video_HDR10 Black_Shark_5_Pro_Gamut_Video_SDR Black_Shark_5_Pro_motion_framedrops_fps_1 Black_Shark_5_Pro_motion_framedrops_fps_2 Black_Shark_5_Pro_artifacts_aliasing_full Black_Shark_5_Pro_artifacts_aliasing_crops_dut_1 Black_Shark_5_Pro_artifacts_aliasing_crops_dut_2 Black_Shark_5_Pro_artifacts_aliasing_crops_dut_3
Sony Xperia 1 IV Display test https://www.dxomark.com/sony-xperia-1-iv-display-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/sony-xperia-1-iv-display-test/#respond Tue, 29 Nov 2022 14:42:17 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=134051&preview=true&preview_id=134051 We put the Sony Xperia 1 IV through our rigorous DXOMARK Display test suite to measure its performance across six criteria. In this test results summary, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases. Overview Key display specifications: 6.5-inch OLED (~85% screen-to-body ratio) Dimensions: 165.0 x [...]

The post Sony Xperia 1 IV Display test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
We put the Sony Xperia 1 IV through our rigorous DXOMARK Display test suite to measure its performance across six criteria. In this test results summary, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview

Key display specifications:

  • 6.5-inch OLED (~85% screen-to-body ratio)
  • Dimensions: 165.0 x 71.0 x 8.2 mm (6.50 x 2.80 x 0.32 inches)
  • Resolution: 1644 x 3840 pixels (~643 ppi density)
  • Aspect ratio: 21:9
  • Refresh rate: 120 Hz

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Sony Xperia 1 IV
126
display
109

160

145

163

125

162

151

155

143

165

133

149

Pros

  • The device is smooth in every use case
  • No frame drops when watching videos and when playing video games
  • Colors are accurate in indoor and low-light conditions but only display sRGB colors

Cons

  • A strong green cast is visible when viewing the device on angle
  • Brightness is too low under sunlight and in low-light conditions
  • Lack of brightness and dark tones in HDR10 videos

The Sony Xperia 1 IV offers good display performance overall, with accurate colors both indoors and in low light. Its excellent control of motion means that there are no frame drops to mar the user experience when watching videos or when playing video games, and it is very pleasantly smooth in every use case. Its brightness is too low under sunlight and in low light, however; and while the device has good color fidelity when viewed on axis, a strong green cast appears when viewing content on angle.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Display tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone and other display reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective and perceptual tests under controlled lab and real-life conditions. Note that we evaluate display attributes using only the device’s built-in display hardware and its still image (gallery) and video apps at their default settings. (For in-depth information about how we evaluate smartphone and other displays, check out our articles, “How DXOMARK tests display quality” and “A closer look at DXOMARK Display testing.

The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations under the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

[glossary_exclude]Readability[/glossary_exclude]

109

Sony Xperia 1 IV

160

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]
How Display Readability score is composed

Readability evaluates how easily and comfortably users can read still content (photos & web) on the display under different real-life conditions. DXOMARK uses its Display Bench to recreate ambient light conditions ranging from total darkness to bright sunlight. In addition to laboratory tests, perceptual analysis is also made in real-life environments.

Brightness under various lighting conditions
Contrast under various lighting conditions


Readability in an indoor (1000 lux) environment
From left to right: Sony Xperia 1 IV, Sony Xperia 1 III, Realme GT 2 Pro, Xiaomi 12T Pro
(Photos for illustration only)


Readability in a sunlight (>90 0000 lux) environment
From left to right: Sony Xperia 1 IV, Sony Xperia 1 III, Realme GT 2 Pro, Xiaomi 12T Pro
(Photos for illustration only)

Luminance uniformity measurement
This graph shows the uniformity of the display with a 20% gray pattern. The more visible the green color, the more uniform the display.

[glossary_exclude]Color[/glossary_exclude]

145

Sony Xperia 1 IV

163

[glossary_exclude]Sony Xperia 5 IV[/glossary_exclude]
How Display Color score is composed

The color attribute evaluates the capacity of the device to accurately reproduce colors. The measurements taken are for fidelity, white point color, and gamut coverage. We perform color evaluations for different lighting conditions to see how well the device can manage color in the surrounding environment. Colors are measured using a spectrophotometer in a controlled lighting environment. Perceptual analysis of color rendering is against the reference pattern displayed on a calibrated professional monitor.

White point under D65 illuminant at 1000 lux

Color fidelity measurements
Sony Xperia 1 IV, color fidelity at 1000 lux in the sRGB color space
Sony Xperia 1 IV, color fidelity at 1000 lux in the Display-P3 color space
Each arrow represents the color difference between a target color pattern (base of the arrow) and its actual measurement (tip of the arrow). The longer the arrow, the more visible the color difference is. If the arrow stays within the circle, the color difference will be visible only to trained eyes.
Color behavior on angle
This graph shows the color shift when the screen is at an angle. Each dot represents a measurement at a particular angle. Dots inside the inner circle exhibit no color shift in angle; those between the inner and outer circle have shifts that only trained experts will see; but those falling outside the outer circle are noticeable.

[glossary_exclude]Video[/glossary_exclude]

125

Sony Xperia 1 IV

162

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)[/glossary_exclude]
How Display Video score is composed

Our video attribute evaluates the Standard Dynamic Range (SDR) and High Dynamic Range (HDR10) video handling of each device in indoor and low-light conditions. We measure tone mapping, color gamut, brightness and contrast of the display. We perform perceptual analysis against our professional reference monitor (Sony BVM-HX310) to ensure that the rendering respects the artistic intent.

Video brightness at 10% APL in the dark ( < 5 lux)


Video rendering in a low-light (0 lux) environment
Clockwise from top left: Sony Xperia 1 IV, Sony Xperia 1 III, Realme GT 2 Pro, Xiaomi 12T Pro
(Photos for illustration only)

Gamut coverage for video content
HDR10 Gamut coverage
SDR Gamut coverage
The primary colors are measured both in HDR10 and SDR. The extracted color gamut shows the extent of the color area that the device can render. To respect the artistic intent, the measured gamut should match the master color space of each video.

[glossary_exclude]Motion[/glossary_exclude]

151

Sony Xperia 1 IV

155

[glossary_exclude]Huawei P40 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
How Display Motion score is composed

The motion attribute evaluates the handling of dynamic contents. Frame drops, motion blur, and playback artifacts are scrutinized using games and videos.


Video frame drops
30 fps content
60 fps content
These long exposure photos present the number of frame irregularities in a 30-second video. A good performance shows a regular pattern (either a flat gray image or a pull-down pattern).

[glossary_exclude]Touch[/glossary_exclude]

143

Sony Xperia 1 IV

165

[glossary_exclude]OnePlus 9[/glossary_exclude]
How Display Touch score is composed

To evaluate touch, DXOMARK uses a touch robot and a high-speed camera to play and record a set of scenarios for smoothness, accuracy and response-time evaluation.

Average Touch Response Time Sony Xperia 1 IV
74 ms
Fast
Good
Bad
Slow
This response time test evaluates precisely the time elapsed between a single touch of the robot on the screen and the displayed action. This test is applied to activities that require a high reactivity, such as gaming.

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

133

Sony Xperia 1 IV

149

[glossary_exclude]LG Wing[/glossary_exclude]
How Display Artifacts score is composed

Evaluating artifacts means checking for the performance, image rendering and motion flaws that can affect the end-user experience. DXOMARK measures precisely the device’s reflectance and the presence of flicker, and assesses the impact of residual aliasing when playing video games, among other characteristics.

Average Reflectance (SCI) Sony Xperia 1 IV
4.6 %
Low
Good
Bad
High
Reflectance measurement (SCI)
Measurements above show the reflection of the device within the visible spectrum range (400 nm to 700 nm). It includes both diffuse and specular reflection.
Flicker Frequency Sony Xperia 1 IV
480 Hz
Bad
Good
Bad
Great
Flicker comparison
This graph represents the frequencies of lighting variation; the highest peak gives the main flicker frequency.
Aliasing (closeup)
Sony Xperia 1 IV
(Photos for illustration only)

Sony Xperia 1 IV – Crop1
Sony Xperia 1 IV – Crop 2
Sony Xperia 1 IV – Crop3

The post Sony Xperia 1 IV Display test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/sony-xperia-1-iv-display-test/feed/ 0 DISPLAY DISPLAY Sony_Xperia_1_IV_readability_indoor Sony_Xperia_1_IV_readability_sunlight Sony_Xperia_1_IV_readability_uniformity Sony_Xperia_1_IV_White_Point_CCT_vs_Ambient Color_Fidelity_Still_sRGB_1000lux_Zoom Color_Fidelity_Still_P3_1000lux_Zoom Sony_Xperia_1_IV_Scatter_Cono_White_P3_Zoom Sony_Xperia_1_IV_video_lowlight_1 Sony_Xperia_1_IV_Gamut_Video_HDR10 Sony_Xperia_1_IV_Gamut_Video_SDR Sony_Xperia_1_IV_motion_framedrops_fps_1 Sony_Xperia_1_IV_motion_framedrops_fps_2 Sony_Xperia_1_IV_artifacts_aliasing_full Sony_Xperia_1_IV_artifacts_aliasing_crops_dut_1 Sony_Xperia_1_IV_artifacts_aliasing_crops_dut_2 Sony_Xperia_1_IV_artifacts_aliasing_crops_dut_3
Google Pixel 6a Audio test https://www.dxomark.com/google-pixel-6a-audio-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/google-pixel-6a-audio-test/#respond Fri, 25 Nov 2022 14:46:59 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=133872 We put the Google Pixel 6a through our rigorous DXOMARK Audio test suite to measure its performance both at recording sound using its built-in microphones, and at playing audio back through its speakers. In this review, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases. Overview Key [...]

The post Google Pixel 6a Audio test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
We put the Google Pixel 6a through our rigorous DXOMARK Audio test suite to measure its performance both at recording sound using its built-in microphones, and at playing audio back through its speakers.

In this review, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview


Key audio specifications include:

  • Two speakers (top center – bottom right)
  • No jack audio output

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.


Google Pixel 6a
135
audio
136
playback
129

158

130

149

152

162

125

162

116

157

135
recording
129

147

133

146

97

157

109

170

145

Best

135

166

Playback

Pros

  • Good dynamics performance across all volume levels
  • Good distance rendering and localizability
  • No speaker occlusion with natural hand position
  • Audio artifacts well under control

Cons

  • Slightly thin tonal balance, midrange-focused, lack of low-end extension
  • Narrow sound scene

Recording

Pros

  • Good tonal balance; emphasis on lower spectrum results in better concert recording than Pixel 6
  • Good dynamics performance
  • Wide recorded sound scene in video

Cons

  • Narrow sound scene with selfie video
  • Extra bass (compared with Pixel 6) results in some bass distortions

In our DXOMARK Audio testing, the Google Pixel 6a delivered an excellent performance for a device in its class. Overall, audio results were very similar to the standard Pixel 6, with only some minor differences between the two models. As a playback device, the Pixel 6a was most suitable for movie watching and listening to music, thanks to a good dynamics performance, distance perception, and localizability of individual sound sources. In addition, when holding the phone normally, it was pretty much impossible to involuntarily cover the speakers. However, our testers found the tonal balance to lack bass and the sound scene to be more narrow than expected for a device of the Pixel’s dimensions.

The recording performance was just as good as playback. The Google device was most suitable for main camera recording, closely followed by front camera video recording. Audio recordings featured a good tonal balance, with more low-end extension than the standard Pixel 6, good dynamics, and  when recording with the main camera,  good wideness. The latter was more limited with the selfie camera, though, and the stronger focus on bass also resulted in more distortion.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Audio tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone audio reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective tests and undertake more than 20 hours of perceptual evaluation under controlled lab conditions.
(For more details about our Playback protocol, click here; for more details about our Recording protocol, click here.)

The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations under the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

[glossary_exclude]Playback[/glossary_exclude]

136

Google Pixel 6a

163

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
How Audio Playback score is composed

DXOMARK engineers test playback through the smartphone speakers, whose performance is evaluated in our labs and in real-life conditions, using default apps and settings.

In playback, the Pixel 6a sounded a little thin and midrange-focused, lacking both low and high-end extension, but it was still an improvement over the Pixel 6. Dynamics performance was average for this class of device, with a consistent punch. Attack could have been sharper but remained relatively consistent across volume levels. Bass precision was an improvement over the standard Pixel 6 and remained consistent at both extremes of the volume scale.

The sound scene created by the speakers was slightly narrower than we would have expected from a device with the Pixel 6a’s dimensions, but individual instruments and voices were very easy to locate within the scene. Distance rendering was very good, but our testers noted that the left/right channels of the stereo did not follow device rotation when playing games.

The device delivered good loudness at maximum volume, and the lowest audio setting was nicely tuned and intelligible. In terms of audio artifacts, some slight pumping was noticeable at maximum volume and our testers also noticed some slight static noise on some occasions.

Listen to the tested smartphone’s playback performance in this comparison with some of its competitors:

Google Pixel 6a
Google Pixel 6
Xiaomi 12T
Recordings of the smartphones playing some of our music tracks at 60 LAeq in an anechoic environment by 2 microphones in A-B configuration, at 30 cm
Here is how the Google Pixel 6a performs in playback use cases compared to its competitors:
[glossary_exclude]Playback use-cases scores[/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Timbre[/glossary_exclude]

129

Google Pixel 6a

158

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The Timbre score represents how well a phone reproduces sound across the audible tonal range and takes into account bass, midrange, treble, tonal balance, and volume dependency. It is the most important attribute for playback.

[glossary_exclude]Music playback frequency response[/glossary_exclude]
A 1/12 octave frequency response graph, which measures the volume of each frequency emitted by the smartphone when playing a pure-sine wave in an anechoic environment.

[glossary_exclude]Dynamics[/glossary_exclude]

130

Google Pixel 6a

149

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The Dynamics score measures the accuracy of changes in the energy level of sound sources, for example how precisely a bass note is reproduced or the impact sound from drums.


[glossary_exclude]Spatial[/glossary_exclude]

152

Google Pixel 6a

162

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The sub-attributes for spatial tests include pinpointing a specific sound's location, its positional balance, distance, and wideness.


[glossary_exclude]Volume[/glossary_exclude]

125

Google Pixel 6a

162

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The Volume score represents the overall loudness of a smartphone and how smoothly volume increases and decreases based on user input.

Here are a few sound pressure levels (SPL) measured when playing our sample recordings of hip-hop and classical music at maximum volume:
Hip-Hop Classical
Google Pixel 6a 74.1 dBA 69.1 dBA
Google Pixel 6 74.9 dBA 69.6 dBA
Xiaomi 12T 74.8 dBA 69.4 dBA
The following graph shows the gradual changes in volume going from minimum to maximum. We expect these changes to be consistent across the range, so that all volume steps correspond to users’ expectations:
[glossary_exclude]Music volume consistency[/glossary_exclude]
This line graph shows the relative loudness of playback relative to the user selected volume step, measured at different volume steps with a correlated pink noise in an anechoic box recorded in axis at 0.20 meter.

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

116

Google Pixel 6a

157

[glossary_exclude]Asus ROG Phone 5[/glossary_exclude]

The Artifacts score measures the extent to which the sound is affected by various types of distortion. The higher the score, the less the disturbances in the sound are noticeable. Distortion can occur because of sound processing in the device and because of the quality of the speakers.

[glossary_exclude]Playback Total Harmonic Distortion (Maximum Volume)[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the Total Harmonic Distortion and Noise over the hearable frequency range.
It represents the distortion and noise of the device playing our test signal (0 dB Fs, Sweep Sine in an anechoic box at 40 cm) at the device's maximum volume.

[glossary_exclude]Recording[/glossary_exclude]

135

Google Pixel 6a

157

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
How Audio Recording score is composed

DXOMARK engineers test recording by evaluating the recorded files on reference audio equipment. Those recordings are done in our labs and in real-life conditions, using default apps and settings.

When recording audio, the Pixel 6a offered a good timbre performance, with good tonal balance in all conditions, even at high sound pressure levels, for example when recording concerts. Thanks to a consistent and smooth midrange, voices sounded clear. However, the lower end was slightly impaired by distortion. In terms of dynamics, the Google device offered a good signal-to-noise ratio, a sharp and precise attack as well as an accurate envelope rendition, even at loud volumes.

When recording video with the main camera, the recorded sound scene was wide, but with slightly imprecise localizability of individual sound sources. Distance rendition was good. The wideness of the audio scene was more limited when shooting selfie video in portrait orientation. Voices remained well-centered, though, and localizability was better than for the main camera video.

Recording loudness was very good. In fact, the Pixel 6a was the best Pixel device in this respect that we have seen to date. Artifacts were well under control as well, with only some slight clipping on louder content and some distortion with loud bass. Background rendition on main camera recordings was clean but came with a slightly nasal tonal balance and, despite the overall extra bass, it  sounded quite thin. The tonal balance was more natural in front camera recordings.

Here is how the Google Pixel 6a performs in recording use cases compared to its competitors:

[glossary_exclude]Recording use-cases scores[/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Timbre[/glossary_exclude]

129

Google Pixel 6a

147

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic3 Pro+[/glossary_exclude]

The Timbre score represents how well a phone captures sounds across the audible tonal range and takes into account bass, midrange, treble, and tonal balance. It is the most important attribute for recording.

[glossary_exclude]Life video frequency response[/glossary_exclude]
A 1/12 octave frequency response graph, which measures the volume of each frequency captured by the smartphone when recording a pure-sine wave in an anechoic environment.

[glossary_exclude]Dynamics[/glossary_exclude]

133

Google Pixel 6a

146

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The Dynamics score measures the accuracy of changes in the energy level of sound sources, for example how precisely a voice's plosives (the p's, t's and k's, for example) are reproduced. The score also considers the Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR), for example how loud the main voice is compared to the background noise.


[glossary_exclude]Spatial[/glossary_exclude]

97

Google Pixel 6a

157

[glossary_exclude]Asus ROG Phone 5[/glossary_exclude]

The sub-attributes for spatial tests include pinpointing a specific sound's location, its positional balance, distance, and wideness on the recorded audio files.

[glossary_exclude]Recording directivity[/glossary_exclude]
Directivity graph of the smartphone when recording test signals using the camera app, with the main camera. It represents the acoustic energy (in dB) over the angle of incidence of the sound source. (Normalized to the angle 0°, in front of the device.)

[glossary_exclude]Volume[/glossary_exclude]

109

Google Pixel 6a

170

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

The Volume score represents how loud audio is normalized on the recorded files and the how the device handles loud environments, such as electronic concerts, when recording.

Here are the sound levels recorded in the audio and video files, measured in LUFS (Loudness Unit Full Scale); as a reference, we expect loudness levels to be above -24 LUFS for recorded content:
Meeting Life Video Selfie Video Memo
Google Pixel 6a -27.6 LUFS -19.3 LUFS -17.8 LUFS -20.9 LUFS
Google Pixel 6 -27.8 LUFS -17.9 LUFS -16.3 LUFS -19.8 LUFS
Xiaomi 12T -27.9 LUFS -21.3 LUFS -19.5 LUFS -21.4 LUFS

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

145

Google Pixel 6a

Best

[glossary_exclude][/glossary_exclude]

The Artifacts score measures the extent to which the recorded sounds are affected by various types of distortions. The higher the score, the less the disturbances in the sound are noticeable. Distortions can occur because of sound processing in the device and the quality of the microphones, as well as user handling, such as how the phone is held.

In this audio comparison, you can listen to the way this smartphone handles wind noise relative to its competitors:

Recordings of a voice sample with light background noise, facing a turbulent wind of 5 m/s

[glossary_exclude]Background[/glossary_exclude]

135

Google Pixel 6a

166

[glossary_exclude]Black Shark 5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Background evaluates how natural the various sounds around a voice blend into the video recording file. For example, when recording a speech at an event, the background should not interfere with the main voice, yet it should provide some context of the surroundings.

The post Google Pixel 6a Audio test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/google-pixel-6a-audio-test/feed/ 0 Best AUDIO AUDIO Best