评语：强大的游戏智能手机，但在日常使用方面仍有差距
RedMagic 10S Pro 是一款功能强大的智能手机，适合追求快速硬件和喜欢游戏的用户。它拥有反应灵敏的显示屏和额外的感应按键，在这些方面提供了真正的附加值。
显示屏上没有为自拍摄像头开孔，这有助于实现不间断的观看体验；后置摄像头也与机身完全平齐，这在同价位的其他竞争产品上都找不到。
名义上，快速的骁龙 8 精英领先版使努比亚红魔 10S Pro 成为速度最快的智能手机。然而，努比亚红魔 10S Pro 往往无法发挥这一优势，因为尽管风扇处于工作状态，但 10S Pro 无法始终应对所产生的热量。此外，表面温度也会升得很高。
由于红魔 10S Pro 不支持 eSIM 或无线充电，因此在日常使用中也不得不做出一些妥协。虽然更新周期有所延长，但仍未达到最佳状态，摄像头也仅处于中端水平。
Pros
Cons
价格和供应情况
测试版本的努比亚红魔 10S Pro 可直接从制造商的在线商店购买，售价 799 美元。该商店还提供其他颜色和内存版本。
RedMagic 10S Pro 是 RedMagic 10 Pro 的升级版。 RedMagic 10 Pro的升级版，配备了速度更快的 SoC、内存和内置存储器，以及功能更强大的相机传感器。
配备 12/256GB 内存的入门级机型的零售价为 649 欧元，配备 24GB 内存和 1 TB 内置存储器的机型的零售价则高达 999 欧元。
规格RedMagic 10S Pro
构造和功能：RedMagic 10S Pro 不防水
RedMagic 10S Pro 再次采用了前代产品的边框设计，并有三种新颜色可供选择：夜幕、黄昏和月光。手机的做工质量很高，虽然在扭动时会有轻微的嘎吱声，但窄边框设计给人留下了深刻印象。
摄像头位于后玻璃盖板下方，因此没有摄像头凸起。遗憾的是，这款游戏手机既不防尘也不防水，仅通过了 IP54 认证。
机载功能令人印象深刻。RedMagic 10S Pro 采用骁龙 8 精英领先版，CPU 和 GPU 的峰值时钟速率均高于标准版。
此外，还配备了最先进的 UFS 4.1 存储、LPDDR5T 内存和 USB 3.2 Gen2 接口--目前在这些方面已经做到了极致。此外，还有两个感应按钮，可用于游戏控制。
集成风扇可以选择激活，但几乎不会产生任何影响。风扇的噪音最高可达 44 dB(A)，声音相当大。
RedMagic 10S Pro 提供良好的通信硬件，包括 5G 和 Wi-Fi 7，但语音质量一般，而且不支持 eSIM。线性振动电机可提供清晰的反馈，光学指纹传感器可用于生物识别安全。
软件和可持续性：Android 15 更新周期比以前更长
RedMagic 10S Pro 预装了谷歌Android 15 和 RedMagicOS 10.5。在欧盟和英国，更新期限延长至五年（其他情况下为三年），仍低于欧盟的要求。测试时，安全更新截至 2025 年 5 月 1 日。
外包装含有大量塑料，RedMagic 没有提供任何有关可持续发展的信息。欧盟能源标签电池标明可更换，但用户无法更换，因为努比亚既没有提供合适的备件，也没有说明。
相机：RedMagic 10S Pro 的光学性能一般
RedMagic 10S Pro 的前置摄像头位于显示屏下方，可以不间断地查看内容。不过，质量相当一般，许多细节淹没在粗糙的像素海洋中，而照片的饱和度却很高。
虽然后置镜头在大多数情况下都能提供高分辨率，但成像质量却相当一般，只达到了中档智能手机的水平。变焦拍摄即使在低倍率水平下也不理想，10 倍变焦已经是极限了。
前置摄像头可录制全高清 30 帧/秒的视频。背面的主摄像头可拍摄 8K 30 fps 和 4K 60 fps 等格式的视频。
显示屏快速 AMOLED，触摸采样频率高达 960 赫兹
RedMagic 10S Pro 的 6.85 英寸 AMOLED 显示屏刷新率高达 144 Hz，多点触摸采样率高达 960 Hz。分辨率很高，确保了吸引人的像素密度。出厂色彩校准也令人印象深刻。
面板亮度很高，但与同类产品的最高值相差甚远。最低亮度也略高。
显示屏以 120 Hz 的基本频率闪烁，但也使用了高频 PWM 调光，在最低显示亮度下以 2,083 Hz 的频率闪烁，因此应该比较容易看清。
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 91 %
Center on Battery: 1442 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE ColorChecker Calman: 2 | ∀{0.5-29.43 Ø4.82}
ΔE Greyscale Calman: 2.3 | ∀{0.09-98 Ø5.1}
98.6% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.38
CCT: 6284 K
| Nubia RedMagic 10S Pro AMOLED, 2688x1216, 6.9" | Asus ROG Phone 9 Pro AMOLED, 2400x1080, 6.8" | Samsung Galaxy S25 AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.2" | Xiaomi 15 OLED, 2670x1200, 6.4" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 25% | -17% | 0% | |
| Brightness middle | 1442 | 1682 17% | 1301 -10% | 1021 -29% |
| Brightness | 1453 | 1685 16% | 1311 -10% | 1018 -30% |
| Brightness Distribution | 91 | 97 7% | 98 8% | 98 8% |
| Black Level * | ||||
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 2 | 1.1 45% | 3.1 -55% | 1.3 35% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 3.3 | 2.1 36% | 4.4 -33% | 2.9 12% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.3 | 1.7 26% | 2.3 -0% | 2.2 4% |
| Gamma | 2.38 92% | 2.27 97% | 2.01 109% | 2.25 98% |
| CCT | 6284 103% | 6581 99% | 6454 101% | 6658 98% |
* ... smaller is better
| Display / APL18 Peak Brightness | |
| Samsung Galaxy S25 | |
| Nubia RedMagic 10S Pro | |
| Display / HDR Peak Brightness | |
| Samsung Galaxy S25 | |
| Nubia RedMagic 10S Pro | |
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 120 Hz Amplitude: 13.92 % Secondary Frequency: 2083 Hz |  | |
The display backlight flickers at 120 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) . The frequency of 120 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8291 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.49 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 0.5135 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 3 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.4 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 1.08 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.468 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 0.609 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 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 3 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32 ms). | ||
RedMagic 10S Pro：进一步测量和性能测试
| Networking | |
| Nubia RedMagic 10S Pro | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| Asus ROG Phone 9 Pro | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| Samsung Galaxy S25 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| Xiaomi 15 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| Average Wi-Fi 7 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| Average of class Smartphone | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| Nubia RedMagic 10S Pro | Asus ROG Phone 9 Pro | Samsung Galaxy S25 | Xiaomi 15 | Average 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | 2% | -40% | -17% | -8% | -44% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 3948.03 | 4026.96 2% | 3982.43 1% | 3934.92 0% | 3973 ? 1% | 2181 ? -45% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 3499.89 | 3773.6 8% | 2256.71 -36% | 3889.06 11% | 3591 ? 3% | 1791 ? -49% |
| Random Read 4KB | 450.84 | 441.13 -2% | 299.89 -33% | 296.95 -34% | 374 ? -17% | 295 ? -35% |
| Random Write 4KB | 634.2 | 637.2 0% | 51.76 -92% | 360.36 -43% | 506 ? -20% | 342 ? -46% |
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 55 °C / 131 F, compared to the average of 35.2 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 247 °C for the class Smartphone.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 53.4 °C / 128 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 30.6 °C / 87 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.
3DMarkSteel Nomad 压力测试
| 3DMark | |
| Wild Life Stress Test Stability | |
| Asus ROG Phone 9 Pro | |
| Nubia RedMagic 10S Pro | |
| Xiaomi 15 | |
| Samsung Galaxy S25 | |
| Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability | |
| Asus ROG Phone 9 Pro | |
| Asus ROG Phone 9 Pro | |
| Nubia RedMagic 10S Pro | |
| Xiaomi 15 | |
Nubia RedMagic 10S Pro audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (89.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 7.8% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.5% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 41% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 51% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 36%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 59% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 34% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Asus ROG Phone 9 Pro audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (90.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.6% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 4% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 92% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 36%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 24% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 71% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
| Battery Runtime - WiFi v1.3 | |
| Nubia RedMagic 10S Pro | |
| Asus ROG Phone 9 Pro | |
| Samsung Galaxy S25 | |
| Xiaomi 15 | |
Notebookcheck 对努比亚红魔 10S Pro 的总体印象
努比亚红魔 10S Pro 主攻游戏领域，并为此配备了强大的功能。但在日常使用中，我们还缺少一些功能，如更高的 IP 认证、eSIM 支持和无线充电。更新供应也不理想。
Nubia RedMagic 10S Pro
- 08/12/2025 v8
Daniel Schmidt
Total Sustainability Score: 潜在替代品比较
Image | Model / Review | Price | Weight | Drive | Display |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. 86.1%  | Nubia RedMagic 10S Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 830 ⎘ 16 GB Memory, 512 GB | Amazon: $949.00 List Price: 799€ | 229 g | 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash | 6.85" 2688x1216 431 PPI AMOLED |
2. 89.8%  | Asus ROG Phone 9 Pro Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 830 ⎘ 24 GB Memory, 1024 GB | Amazon: 1. $10.79 Ibywind Screen Protector for... 2. $11.99 Guizzcg 2 Pack Screen Protec... 3. $313.09 Lkfyyds for ASUS ROG Phone 9... List Price: 1499€ | 227 g | 1 TB UFS 4.0 Flash | 6.78" 2400x1080 388 PPI AMOLED |
3. 88.9%  | Samsung Galaxy S25 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 830 ⎘ 12 GB Memory, 256 GB | Amazon: 1. $7.58 firtstnow 3 Pack Glass Scree... 2. $7.58 firtstnow 3 Pack Glass Scree... 3. OtterBox Samsung Galaxy S25 ... List Price: 899€ | 162 g | 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 6.20" 2340x1080 416 PPI AMOLED |
4. 88.4%  | Xiaomi 15 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 830 ⎘ 12 GB Memory, 512 GB | Amazon: 1. $209.98 XIAOMI Watch S4 Smartwatch w... 2. $29.11 JOYFAR Portable-Charger-Powe... 3. $10.79 Ibywind Screen Protector For... List Price: 760€ | 191 g | 512 GB UFS 4.0 Flash | 6.36" 2670x1200 460 PPI OLED |
Transparency
The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was provided to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or retailer for the purpose of this review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review. We never accept compensation or payment in return for our reviews. As an independent media company, Notebookcheck is not subjected to the authority of manufacturers, retailers or publishers.
This is how Notebookcheck is testing
Every year, Notebookcheck independently reviews hundreds of laptops and smartphones using standardized procedures to ensure that all results are comparable. We have continuously developed our test methods for around 20 years and set industry standards in the process. In our test labs, high-quality measuring equipment is utilized by experienced technicians and editors. These tests involve a multi-stage validation process. Our complex rating system is based on hundreds of well-founded measurements and benchmarks, which maintains objectivity. Further information on our test methods can be found here.
