一款让你忘记其价格的旗舰机型——小米17T Pro评测

Name: Xiaomi 17T Pro
Brand: Xiaomi

价格胜过声望。

小米17T Pro 承诺以极具吸引力的价格提供高端技术。在本篇评测中，我们将评估其屏幕、摄像头、性能和电池续航在日常使用中的表现，并探讨这款智能手机在激烈竞争中能否兑现其高端承诺。
Daniel Schmidt, 👁 Daniel Schmidt (translated by DeepL / Ninh Duy) Published 07/29/2026 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...
5G Android Smartphone Touchscreen

小米17T Pro评测

|小米17TPro是在前代机型核心优势基础上进行的合理升级。全新的天玑9500处理器性能强劲；亮度极高且色彩精准的AMOLED显示屏依然是该设备的主要优势之一；而徕卡相机系统凭借强大的主镜头和设计精良的5倍潜望式变焦镜头令人印象深刻。 7,000毫安时电池将这款智能手机的续航能力提升到了一个全新的高度。尽管性能强劲，但在日常使用中发热情况仍可控，不过在长时间高强度使用时，设备会明显降频。

Test device courtesy of Xiaomi

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

|最大的弱点在于那些小米多年来未能持续改进的方面。USB接口仍仅支持速度较慢的USB 2.0标准，且不支持视频输出。超广角摄像头与其他摄像头相比表现明显逊色；扬声器仅在中等音量下音质尚可，而在较大的环境噪音中通话质量会明显下降。此外，系统中还预装了第三方应用和广告。系统更新保障尚可，但仍不及领先竞争对手。

Pros

+ 电池续航时间长且支持快充

+ 主摄像头和变焦功能出色

+ 屏幕亮度高且色彩准确

+ 高速 Wi-Fi 7

Cons

- 仅支持 USB 2.0

- 音质平平的扬声器

- 性能较弱的超广角镜头

价格与供货情况

小米17T Pro可直接在小米商城购买，提供以下存储配置：12 / 256 GB（建议零售价：900欧元）， 12/512 GB（建议零售价：1,000 欧元）以及 12/1,024 GB（建议零售价：1,100 欧元）。

此外，您还可以在ComputerUniverse 以更低的价格购买，或在Sparhandy 通过合约购买。

$830.00
XIAOMI 17T PRO Ai 5G (Compatible with Tmobile Mint Tello & Global) (512GB + 12GB) NFC Global ROM Unlocked 50MP Triple Pro Leica Cam eSIM 6.83" 144Mhz Model 2602EPTC0G Liberado (Black)
$849.50
XIAOMI 17T PRO Ai 5G (Compatible with Tmobile Mint Tello & Global) (512GB + 12GB) NFC Global ROM Unlocked 50MP Triple Pro Leica Cam eSIM 6.83" 144Mhz Model 2506BPN68G Liberado (Deep Blue)
$859.00
Xiaomi 17T PRO Ai 5G (Compatible with Tmobile Mint Tello & Global) (512GB + 12GB) NFC Global ROM Unlocked 50MP Triple Pro Leica Cam eSIM 6.83" 144Mhz Model 2506BPN68G Liberado (Deep Violet)

小米17T Pro评测
规格参数：小米17T Pro
案例——小米手机通过IP68认证
产品特性——小米17T Pro仅支持USB 2.0
软件——17T Pro 也将获得 Android 21 系统更新
通信与GNSS——配备超强Wi-Fi 7功能的智能手机
手机功能与通话质量
相机——17T Pro 搭载的强大徕卡三摄组合
配件与保修——不包含电源适配器，但包含保护套
输入设备与操作——17T Pro 配备光学指纹传感器
显示屏——亮度高且色彩准确的AMOLED屏幕，支持直流调光
性能——小米17T Pro搭载的Dimensity 9500
排放量——在满载状态下，其表现逊于Exynos
电池续航——7,000 mAh 带你直达续航天堂
Notebookcheck 综合评分
可能的替代方案比较

小米15TPro去年在中高端机型领域树立了新标杆，如今，小米17T Pro旨在将这一标准提升得更高。小米并未采取保守的机型更新策略，而是带来了显著的改变，尤其是在硬件配置方面：全新的天玑9500芯片取代了天玑9400+，电池容量从5,500毫安时大幅提升至7,000毫安时，并支持最高100瓦的快充。徕卡相机系统也得到了进一步优化：搭载Light Fusion 950技术的新主摄旨在提供更出色的成像效果，特别是在光线复杂的拍摄环境下。

然而，仅凭更强的性能和更大的电池容量，并不能造就一款更优秀的智能手机。关键问题在于，小米是否在15T Pro的优势基础上进行了针对性优化，并解决了潜在的不足之处。我们的评测将展示小米17T Pro在日常使用中的表现，以及此次升级是否值得额外花费。

规格参数：小米17T Pro

Xiaomi 17T Pro (17 Series)

Processor

MediaTek Dimensity 9500 8c/8t, 1 x 4.2 GHz ARM C1-Ultra, 3 x 3.5 GHz ARM C1-Premium, 4 x 2.7 GHz ARM C1-Pro, Cortex-X930 Travis / Cortex-A730 6x Gelas

Graphics adapter

Arm Mali G1- Ultra MC12

Memory

12 GB

, LPDDR5x

Display

6.83 inch 19.5:9, 2772 x 1280 pixel 447 PPI, capacitive Touchscreen, AMOLED, 12 Bit Color depth, Refresh rate: 60 - 144 Hz, Scratch resistance on Mohs hardness scale: 5; Screen-body-ratio: 91 %; Corning Gorilla Glass 7i, glossy: yes, HDR, 144 Hz

Storage

512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash, 512 GB

, 476.6 GB free

Connections

1 USB 2.0, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), 1 Infrared, Audio Connections: USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: Proximity, Accelerometer, Gyroscope, Electronic compass, Color temperature, OTG, IR-Blaster

Networking

802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6/ Wi-Fi 6E 6 GHz be = Wi-Fi 7), Bluetooth 6.0, 2G (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz), 3G (Band 1, 2, 4, 5, 8), LTE (Band 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28, 32, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 48, 66, 71), 5G-Sub6 (Band 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20, 25, 26, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 48, 66, 71, 75, 77, 78), Dual SIM, LTE, 5G, GPS

Size

height x width x depth (in mm): 8.25 x 162.2 x 77.5

Battery

7000 mAh Lithium-Ion, Silicon-Carbon-Anode

Charging

wireless charging, fast charging / Quickcharge

Operating System

Android 16

Camera

Primary Camera: 50 MPix (Light Fusion 950, f/1.67, 23 mm, OIS) + 12 MPix (Ultra Wide, f/3.0, 15 mm) + 50 MPix (5x opt. Zoom, f/3.0, 115 mm, OIS); Camera2-API-Level: Level 3
Secondary Camera: 32 MPix (f/2.2, 21 mm)

Additional features

Speakers: Dual , HyperOS 3.0, 12 Months Warranty, Bluetooth Audio Codecs: SBC, AAC, aptX, aptX HD, aptX Adaptive, aptX TWS+, LHDC V5, LDAC, LC3; Auracast | GNSS: GPS (L1, L5), Glonass (L1), BeiDou (B1I, B1C, B2a, B2b), Galileo (E1, E5a, E5b), QZSS (L1, L5), NavIC (L5) | HDR: HLG, HDR10, HDR10+, Dolby Vision | DRM Widevine L1 | IP68 | USB Copy Test: 23.16 MB/s (connected to Samsung Portable SSD T7 (USB 3.2 Gen. 2), Supported File Systems for external storages: FAT32, exFAT, NTFS | Body-SAR: 0.998 W/kg, Head-SAR: 0.997 W/kg | charging speed: 10 - 100 W (wired) / up to 50 W (wireless)
Biometric security: optical fingerprint, 2D facial recognition | Vibration motor: linear (X-axis) | Telephony features: Dual-Nano-SIM, Dual-eSIM, Wi-Fi Calling, VoLTE, Vo5G
Update Policy: 5 years Android-Updates (till 06/2031), 6 years security patches (till 05/2032) , fanless, waterproof

Released

05/28/2026

Weight

219 g

Price

1000 Euro

Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

see all specifications

案例——小米手机通过IP68认证

小米17T Pro的标称厚度为8.25毫米，经我们实测确认。算上摄像头模组，其厚度可达11.7毫米。该机型提供深蓝（我们的测试机）、黑色和深紫三种配色。

得益于哑光铝制边框，其做工质感上乘。正面采用康宁大猩猩玻璃7i保护，背面则由玻璃纤维材质制成。边框紧凑且均匀，但在扭转时设备会发出明显的吱吱声。

17T Pro 通过了 IP68 认证，具备防尘和防水功能。

尺寸对比

产品特性——小米17T Pro仅支持USB 2.0

小米17T Pro在许多方面都具备高端配置，从无线连接和摄像头到电池及相关充电技术均是如此。

然而，在USB接口方面，小米依然保持保守态度，继续采用不支持视频输出的标准USB 2.0接口。

软件——17T Pro 也将获得 Android 21 系统更新

小米17T Pro预装Android 16和HyperOS 3.0系统，预计将获得五年的版本更新和六年的安全补丁支持。虽然这些时间跨度已经很长，但三星、谷歌和荣耀的实践表明，更长的支持周期也是可能的。

17T Pro 的系统中也内置了广告，不过其程度比入门级设备要轻。然而，小米对第三方应用毫不避讳，预装了大量此类应用，但所有应用均可卸载。

可持续发展

小米17T Pro的包装出人意料地厚实，但其中并未可见任何塑料部件。小米并未提供有关可持续性或所用材料的具体信息。

在测试时，小米尚未提供维修指南和替换零件；不过，鉴于小米15T Pro曾纳入自助维修计划，17T Pro很可能也会很快加入该计划。

通信与GNSS——配备超强Wi-Fi 7功能的智能手机

移动通信支持的频段范围广泛，仅有少量空白频段，但迄今为止这在欧洲尚未构成问题。日常使用中的信号接收效果良好，无可挑剔。

在Wi-Fi方面，小米17T Pro支持高速的Wi-Fi 7，当与我们的参考路由器华硕RT-BE96U配对使用时，可实现极高的数据传输速率。

Networking
Xiaomi 17T Pro 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be
iperf3 transmit Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U	3845 (min: 3505) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U	4387 (min: 3333) MBit/s ∼100%
Vivo X300 FE 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be
iperf3 transmit Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U	1479 (min: 1211) MBit/s ∼38%
iperf3 receive Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U	1892 (min: 1838) MBit/s ∼43%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be
iperf3 transmit AXE11000	887 (min: 479) MBit/s ∼90%
iperf3 receive AXE11000	914 (min: 876) MBit/s ∼88%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz	1799 (min: 955) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz	1645 (min: 1513) MBit/s ∼100%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be
iperf3 transmit AXE11000	989 (min: 488) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive AXE11000	946 (min: 814) MBit/s ∼91%
Xiaomi 17
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz	1086 (min: 1009) MBit/s ∼60%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz	1262 (min: 1051) MBit/s ∼77%
Average 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be
iperf3 transmit AXE11000	956 (min: 595) MBit/s ∼97%
iperf3 receive AXE11000	1040 (min: 459) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz	1289 (min: 508) MBit/s ∼72%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz	1495 (min: 719) MBit/s ∼91%
iperf3 transmit Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U	2096 (min: 370) MBit/s ∼55%
iperf3 receive Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U	2230 (min: 407) MBit/s ∼51%
Average of class Smartphone
iperf3 transmit AXE11000	687 (min: 52.5) MBit/s ∼69%
iperf3 receive AXE11000	722 (min: 52.2) MBit/s ∼69%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz	1279 (min: 287) MBit/s ∼71%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz	1396 (min: 339) MBit/s ∼85%
iperf3 transmit Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U	1979 (min: 407) MBit/s ∼51%
iperf3 receive Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U	2056 (min: 398) MBit/s ∼47%

Samsung Galaxy S26+ 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1767 (955-1834) MBit/s

Samsung Galaxy S26+ 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1644 (1513-1679) MBit/s

Samsung Galaxy S26+ 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø872 (479-913) MBit/s

Samsung Galaxy S26+ 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø912 (876-933) MBit/s

Xiaomi 17T Pro 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 transmit Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U; iperf 3.1.3: Ø3845 (3505-4039) MBit/s

Xiaomi 17T Pro 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be; iperf3 receive Wi-Fi6/7 RT-BE96U; iperf 3.1.3: Ø4386 (3333-4542) MBit/s

凭借三频GNSS技术，这款小米手机在定位追踪方面拥有出色的基础。即使在室内，它也能相当迅速地捕获卫星信号，不过在室外时的定位精度可能略高一些。

在一次骑行中，我们将17T Pro与Garmin Venu 2进行了对比。尽管智能手机的位置更新频率与智能手表相同，但后者的定位精度总体上更高。不过，这对日常导航任务来说并不构成问题。

手机功能与通话质量

小米17T Pro既可使用两张nano-SIM卡，也可使用两张eSIM卡；两者混合使用同样可行。

贴近耳朵通话时，通话质量令人印象深刻，声音传输自然流畅。然而，背景噪音抑制效果仅属尚可。特别是在主干道上，噪音经常渗入，导致用户的声音听起来有些受限且略显闷哑。

相机——17T Pro 搭载的强大徕卡三摄组合

小米17T Pro的前置摄像头分辨率很高，且未采用像素合并技术。这使得拍摄效果相当出色；即使在较高的ISO设置下，图像依然清晰——算法在这方面表现得相当出色。视频可支持以30帧/秒的帧率录制Ultra HD格式。

亮点在于机身背面：全新的主传感器是OmniVision Light Fusion 950，其1/1.31英寸的尺寸相当大，能够拍摄出优质的画面。图像色调偏暖且明显过曝，导致细节表现略显模糊。不过，景深效果非常突出。

超广角镜头则是整套系统中最薄弱的环节；其边缘区域会出现畸变，且细节略显模糊。不过，另一大亮点是5倍光学潜望式变焦，在AI辅助下甚至可实现120倍放大。在此模式下，成像质量非常稳定，即使在10倍变焦时仍能拍出优质照片。

视频录制最高支持8K（30帧/秒）。超高清（Ultra HD）模式下可实现120帧/秒，但仅限主传感器；若将帧率降至60帧/秒，则可使用所有镜头。

Image comparison

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

Main camera Main camera Ultra wide-angle 5-x Zoom Low-Light

click to load images

Xiaomi 17T Pro

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

Apple iPhone 17 Pro

Canon EOS 90D

click to load images

Xiaomi 17T Pro

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

Apple iPhone 17 Pro

Canon EOS 90D

click to load images

Xiaomi 17T Pro

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

Apple iPhone 17 Pro

Canon EOS 90D

click to load images

Xiaomi 17T Pro

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

Apple iPhone 17 Pro

Canon EOS 90D

click to load images

Xiaomi 17T Pro

Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra

Apple iPhone 17 Pro

Canon EOS 90D

ColorChecker Xiaomi 17T Pro: 8.34 ∆E min: 0.96 - max: 21.04 ∆E

配件与保修——不包含电源适配器，但包含保护套

除了智能手机外，包装内还包含一条 USB-C 数据线、一个 SIM 卡弹出工具以及一个深灰色硅胶保护壳。在欧洲，电源适配器需另行购买。

在德国，保修期为十二个月，可通过“小米护航”保险套餐延长保修期限，该套餐提供为期两年的意外损坏保障（70欧元），也可选择额外包含盗窃保障（99欧元）。

输入设备与操作——17T Pro 配备光学指纹传感器

小米17T Pro的电容式触摸屏响应迅速且可靠。底部边缘集成了光学指纹传感器，能够可靠地识别已注册的指纹，并快速解锁设备。此外，还可通过前置摄像头使用安全性稍低的面部识别功能。

线性振动马达提供了舒适的触觉反馈，尽管部分用户可能觉得振动强度稍大。

实体按键位于机身右侧，操作起来相当方便。不过，手掌较小的人需要调整握持姿势才能触及音量键。

显示屏——亮度高且色彩准确的AMOLED屏幕，支持直流调光

小米17T Pro的AMOLED显示屏与其前代机型15T Pro非常相似，但亮度更高。在测量缩小白区（APL18）时，我们记录到的亮度最高达3,507 cd/m²。像素密度依然很高，刷新率最高可达144 Hz。小米在HDR标准方面也毫不吝啬，支持所有常见格式。

小米将17T Pro的调光技术称为“DC调光”；在最低亮度下，我们测得一个基频为120 Hz，另一个为3,846 Hz，这表明采用了高频PWM调光。尽管如此，该屏幕对眼睛的刺激仍相对较小。在这方面不太可能引发投诉。


1068 cd/m²	1057 cd/m²	1047 cd/m²
1063 cd/m²	1068 cd/m²	1044 cd/m²
1071 cd/m²	1066 cd/m²	1053 cd/m²

Distribution of brightness

tested with X-Rite i1Pro 3

Maximum: 1071 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 1059.7 cd/m² Minimum: 1.53 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 97 %
Center on Battery: 1068 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE ColorChecker Calman: 1.3 | ∀{0.5-29.43 Ø4.71}
ΔE Greyscale Calman: 2.2 | ∀{0.09-98 Ø4.96}
99.7% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.26
CCT: 6875 K

	Xiaomi 17T Pro AMOLED, 2772x1280, 6.8"	Vivo X300 FE AMOLED, 2640x1216, 6.3"	Samsung Galaxy S26+ LTPO-AMOLED, 3120x1440, 6.7"	Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra AMOLED, 2608x1200, 6.9"	Xiaomi 17 LTPO AMOLED , 2656x1220, 6.3"
Display		-39%	-18%	3%
APL18 Peak Brightness (cd/m²)	3507	2035 -42%	2751 -22%	3519 0%
HDR Peak Brightness (cd/m²)	3295	2100 -36%	2875 -13%	3458 5%
Response Times		-9%	-84%	16%	30%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * (ms)	1.13 ?(0.547, 0.5865)	1.3 ?(0.6, 0.7) -15%	3.79 ?(2.137, 1.648) -235%	0.86 ?(0.433, 0.427) 24%	0.4 ?(0.2, 0.2) 65%
Response Time Black / White * (ms)	1.01 ?(0.4925, 0.5165)	1.1 ?(0.6, 0.5) -9%	1.18 ?(0.6195, 0.561) -17%	0.87 ?(0.4395, 0.433) 14%	0.6 ?(0.3, 0.3) 41%
PWM Frequency (Hz)	120	360.9	240	120	120
PWM Amplitude * (%)	15.46	16 -3%	15.27 1%	14.02 9%	18 -16%
Screen		24%	-23%	21%	-13%
Brightness middle (cd/m²)	1068	1096 3%	1384 30%	1771 66%	1030 -4%
Brightness (cd/m²)	1060	1063 0%	1379 30%	1773 67%	1021 -4%
Brightness Distribution (%)	97	92 -5%	95 -2%	99 2%	98 1%
Black Level * (cd/m²)
Colorchecker dE 2000 *	1.3	0.62 52%	2.8 -115%	1.3 -0%	1.44 -11%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *	2.5	1.53 39%	4.5 -80%	2.8 -12%	3.68 -47%
Greyscale dE 2000 *	2.2	1 55%	2.2 -0%	2.1 5%	2.5 -14%
Gamma	2.26 ^97%	2.24 ^98%	2.05 ^107%	2.25 ^98%	2.274 ^97%
CCT	6875 ^95%	6573 ^99%	6514 ^100%	6452 ^101%	6868 ^95%
Total Average (Program / Settings)		-8% / 4%	-42% / -38%	13% / 16%	9% / 1%

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ

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

Screen flickering / PWM detected

120 Hz
Amplitude: 15.46 %
Secondary Frequency: 3846 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: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 7748 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

在固定变焦级别下，采用不同亮度设置进行的一系列测量（尽管最低亮度下的振幅曲线看起来平坦，但这只是由于比例缩放所致。信息框中显示的是最低亮度下振幅的放大图。）

我们使用 Calman 来检测显示器的色彩准确性，并采用默认设置，因为该设置能呈现最自然的显示效果。测量结果非常理想；肉眼无法察觉任何色彩失真。

Display Response Times

ℹ

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.

↔ Response Time Black to White
1.01 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 0.4925 ms rise
1.01 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 0.5165 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. » 4 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (19.8 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
1.13 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 0.547 ms rise
1.13 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 0.5865 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. » 5 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (30.9 ms).

在户外，即使在阳光明媚的日子里，小米17T Pro的屏幕也易于阅读。

可视角度稳定性也很好；不过，在宽视角下，屏幕亮度会降低，色调也会偏冷。

性能——小米17T Pro搭载的Dimensity 9500

小米17TPro搭载联发科天玑9500处理器，配备12 GB运行内存，这不仅确保了系统运行速度快，还非常适合游戏。

然而，其AI跑分却低于预期。

Geekbench 6.7
Single-Core
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	3676 Points +12%
Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288	3662 Points +12%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (3269 - 3635, n=8)	3447 Points +5%
Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288	3269 Points
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	3209 Points -2%
Vivo X300 FE Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 12288	2857 Points -13%
Average of class Smartphone (196 - 3883, n=183, last 2 years)	1878 Points -43%
Multi-Core
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	11034 Points +10%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	11004 Points +10%
Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288	10842 Points +8%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (9402 - 10941, n=8)	10243 Points +2%
Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288	10042 Points
Vivo X300 FE Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 12288	9276 Points -8%
Average of class Smartphone (830 - 11811, n=183, last 2 years)	5591 Points -44%

PCMark for Android - Work 3.x
Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288	19432 Points +27%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	19076 Points +25%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	18445 Points +20%
Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288	15312 Points
Average of class Smartphone (4507 - 28557, n=136, last 2 years)	15199 Points -1%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (13432 - 17480, n=5)	14831 Points -3%

CrossMark - Overall
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	2598 Points +139%
Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288	2356 Points +117%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	2098 Points +93%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (1086 - 2177, n=3)	1661 Points +53%
Vivo X300 FE Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 12288	1504 Points +38%
Average of class Smartphone (376 - 2856, n=103, last 2 years)	1264 Points +16%
Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288	1086 Points

BaseMark OS II
Overall
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	14678 Points +99%
Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288	13984 Points +90%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	11422 Points +55%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (7369 - 11787, n=6)	10474 Points +42%
Average of class Smartphone (1885 - 16690, n=112, last 2 years)	8049 Points +9%
Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288	7369 Points
System
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	20996 Points +116%
Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288	19207 Points +98%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (9722 - 16276, n=6)	14558 Points +50%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	12733 Points +31%
Average of class Smartphone (4117 - 21153, n=112, last 2 years)	11610 Points +19%
Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288	9722 Points
Memory
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	18501 Points +181%
Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288	16964 Points +158%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	13372 Points +103%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (6586 - 13155, n=6)	9806 Points +49%
Average of class Smartphone (2760 - 24052, n=112, last 2 years)	9414 Points +43%
Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288	6586 Points
Graphics
Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288	52356 Points +119%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	51530 Points +115%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	42732 Points +79%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (23930 - 48863, n=6)	40533 Points +69%
Average of class Smartphone (1046 - 61797, n=112, last 2 years)	25222 Points +5%
Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288	23930 Points
Web
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	2321 Points +21%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	2319 Points +21%
Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288	2234 Points +16%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (1924 - 2319, n=6)	2158 Points +12%
Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288	1924 Points
Average of class Smartphone (1062 - 2587, n=112, last 2 years)	1759 Points -9%

UL Procyon AI Inference for Android - Overall Score NNAPI
Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288	23076 Points +697%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	22076 Points +663%
Average of class Smartphone (2895 - 78695, n=97, last 2 years)	19953 Points +589%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	19236 Points +564%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (2895 - 19373, n=5)	14726 Points +409%
Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288	2895 Points

AImark - Score v3.x
Average of class Smartphone (293 - 307528, n=74, last 2 years)	17607 Points
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	1998 Points
Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288	1789 Points
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (n=1)	1620 Points

Geekbench AI
Single Precision NPU 1.7
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	756 Points +158%
Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288	698 Points +138%
Average of class Smartphone (80 - 5210, n=116, last 2 years)	666 Points +127%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	559 Points +91%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (190 - 834, n=7)	442 Points +51%
Vivo X300 FE Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 12288	417 Points +42%
Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288	293 Points
Half Precision NPU 1.7
Average of class Smartphone (80 - 36297, n=116, last 2 years)	2607 Points +722%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	767 Points +142%
Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288	646 Points +104%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	561 Points +77%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (176 - 833, n=7)	439 Points +38%
Vivo X300 FE Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 12288	417 Points +32%
Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288	317 Points
Quantized NPU 1.7
Average of class Smartphone (124 - 49889, n=116, last 2 years)	3911 Points +377%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	1621 Points +98%
Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288	1409 Points +72%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	1285 Points +57%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (432 - 1744, n=7)	993 Points +21%
Vivo X300 FE Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5, Adreno 829, 12288	941 Points +15%
Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288	820 Points

AI Benchmark - Score V6
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	19229 Points
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (765 - 21660, n=4)	9942 Points
Average of class Smartphone (55.6 - 22780, n=77, last 2 years)	5829 Points
Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 12288	1098 Points
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	Points

Antutu v11 - Score
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, Adreno 840, 16384	3753628 Points +15%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (3258253 - 3692957, n=4)	3498009 Points +7%
Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500, Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, 12288	3258253 Points
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600, Xclipse 960, 12288	3190793 Points -2%
Average of class Smartphone (584158 - 4273120, n=37, last 2 years)	2614794 Points -20%

集成的ARM Mali-G1 Ultra图形处理单元支持基于硬件的光线追踪，并提供卓越的性能，在某些情况下甚至超越了Adreno 840。

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	7232 Points +3%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	7005 Points
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	6959 Points -1%
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	6321 Points -10%
Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	4926 Points -30%

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	7206 Points +4%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	7021 Points +1%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	6932 Points
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	6311 Points -9%
Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	4959 Points -28%

3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	30621 Points +44%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	26896 Points +26%
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	25598 Points +20%
Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	21446 Points +1%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	21283 Points

3DMark / Solar Bay Score
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	13785 Points 0%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	13753 Points
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	13036 Points -5%
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	12146 Points -12%

3DMark / Solar Bay Unlimited Score
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	14996 Points
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	13696 Points -9%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	12242 Points -18%
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	12139 Points -19%

3DMark / Steel Nomad Light Unlimited Score
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	3212 Points +18%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	2731 Points
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	2704 Points -1%
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	2532 Points -7%
Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	979 Points -64%

3DMark / Steel Nomad Light Score
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	3265 Points +30%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	2736 Points +9%
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	2566 Points +2%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	2519 Points
Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	1009 Points -60%

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps

GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	893 fps
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	761 fps -15%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	689 fps -23%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	579 fps -35%

GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps

GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	439 fps +5%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	420 fps
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	385 fps -8%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	341 fps -19%

GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps

GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	344 fps +2%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	343 fps +2%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	336 fps
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	332 fps -1%

GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps

GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	221 fps +27%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	198 fps +14%
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	193 fps +11%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	174 fps

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	106 fps -12%
Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	60 fps -50%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	125 fps
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	119 fps -5%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	114 fps -9%
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	108 fps -14%
Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	103 fps -18%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps 0%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	120 fps
Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	60 fps -50%

GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	344 fps
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	313 fps -9%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	296 fps -14%
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	281 fps -18%
Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	241 fps -30%

GFXBench / 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	60 fps
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	56 fps -7%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	50 fps -17%
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	49 fps -18%
Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	44 fps -27%

Jetstream 2 - 2.2 Total
Samsung Galaxy S26+ (Chrome 146)	354.246 Points +198%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (108 - 362, n=7)	247 Points +108%
Average of class Smartphone (2 - 480, n=87, last 2 years)	219 Points +84%
Xiaomi 17T Pro (Edge 147)	118.918 Points
Xiaomi 17T Pro (Chrome 147)	108.028 Points -9%
Xiaomi 17 (Chrome 141)	2 Points -98%

Speedometer 2.0 - Result 2.0
Samsung Galaxy S26+ (Chrome 146)	548 runs/min +234%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (164 - 500, n=2)	332 runs/min +102%
Average of class Smartphone (49.3 - 733, n=77, last 2 years)	263 runs/min +60%
Xiaomi 17T Pro (Chrome 150)	164 runs/min

Speedometer 3 - Score 3.0
Samsung Galaxy S26+ (Chrome 146)	27.1 runs/min
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra (Chrome 143)	25.1 runs/min
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (17.9 - 27.6, n=2)	22.8 runs/min
Xiaomi 17 (Chrome 141)	20.9 runs/min
Average of class Smartphone (3.06 - 45.5, n=87, last 2 years)	16.1 runs/min

WebXPRT 4 - Overall
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (129 - 255, n=3)	174 Points
Average of class Smartphone (56 - 306, n=95, last 2 years)	144.8 Points
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra (Chrome 143)	124 Points
Xiaomi 17 (Chrome 141)	102 Points

Octane V2 - Total Score
Samsung Galaxy S26+ (Chrome 146)	85043 Points +208%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (27638 - 96438, n=5)	65908 Points +138%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra (Chrome 143)	58421 Points +111%
Average of class Smartphone (2800 - 126661, n=141, last 2 years)	52590 Points +90%
Xiaomi 17 (Chrome 141)	50987 Points +84%
Xiaomi 17T Pro (Chrome 150)	27638 Points

Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total
Xiaomi 17T Pro (Chrome 150)	1334.6 ms *
Average of class Smartphone (257 - 28190, n=120, last 2 years)	1062 ms * +20%
Xiaomi 17 (Chrome 141)	634.81 ms * +52%
Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500 (372 - 1335, n=7)	605 ms * +55%
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra (Chrome 143)	522.8 ms * +61%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ (Chrome 146)	387.8 ms * +71%

* ... smaller is better

	Xiaomi 17T Pro	Vivo X300 FE	Samsung Galaxy S26+	Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra	Xiaomi 17	Average 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	Average of class Smartphone
AndroBench 3-5		103%	6%	132%	145%	94%	37%
Sequential Read 256KB (MB/s)	3021.51	3752.1 24%	3574.74 18%	4064.33 35%	3943.44 31%	3633 ?(1954 - 4366, n=43) 20%	2236 ?(270 - 4370, n=171, last 2 years) -26%
Sequential Write 256KB (MB/s)	2770.02	3222.5 16%	2543.31 -8%	3987.65 44%	3784.97 37%	3189 ?(339 - 4113, n=43) 15%	1918 ?(103.2 - 4113, n=171, last 2 years) -31%
Random Read 4KB (MB/s)	414.44	421.6 2%	419.84 1%	575.86 39%	487.69 18%	413 ?(279 - 614, n=43) 0%	312 ?(47.6 - 614, n=171, last 2 years) -25%
Random Write 4KB (MB/s)	108.71	508.6 368%	122.63 13%	551.82 408%	643.31 492%	480 ?(48.2 - 1071, n=43) 342%	359 ?(13.1 - 1071, n=171, last 2 years) 230%

排放量——在满载状态下，其表现逊于Exynos

温度

在持续负载下，小米17T Pro的表面温度确实会明显升高，但最高仅达到42 °C，这绝对是安全的。

然而，在3DMark压力测试中，这会导致明显的降频现象。尽管Galaxy S26+的降频幅度更大，但其整体运行速度更快。

Max. Load

Idle


41.1 °C	41.6 °C	40.3 °C
41.4 °C	42 °C	40.7 °C
40.2 °C	42 °C	38.9 °C

Maximum: 42 °C
Average: 40.9 °C


38.9 °C	39.2 °C	39 °C
38.5 °C	40.1 °C	40.3 °C
38.1 °C	40.1 °C	39.8 °C

Maximum: 40.3 °C
Average: 39.3 °C

Room Temperature 22 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260

(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 40.9 °C / 106 F, compared to the average of 33 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42 °C / 108 F, compared to the average of 35.3 °C / 96 F, ranging from 21.9 to 247 °C for the class Smartphone.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 40.3 °C / 105 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.2 °C / 85 F, compared to the device average of 33 °C / 91 F.

3DMark 压力测试

3DMark
Wild Life Stress Test Stability
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	72.8 % +18%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	61.9 %
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	60.7 % -2%
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test
Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	77 % +19%
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	73.8 % +14%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	64.8 %
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	59.6 % -8%
Solar Bay Stress Test Stability
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	73 % +11%
Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	72.8 % +10%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	65.9 %
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	60.6 % -8%
Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability
Vivo X300 FE Adreno 829, SD 8 Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	98.7 % +66%
Xiaomi 17 Adreno 840, SD 8 Elite Gen 5, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	74.7 % +26%
Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	63.6 % +7%
Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	59.5 %

Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.14.3: Ø32.2 (26-40.1) %

Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.14.3: Ø29.2 (25.6-42.9) %

Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø96.7 (75.7-122.2) %

Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø110.7 (95.2-156.9) %

Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø150 (129.5-161.9) %

Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Solar Bay Unlimited Stress Test Stability; 1.0.17.4: Ø38.1 (31.2-48.9) %

Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash; Solar Bay Stress Test Stability; 1.0.17.4: Ø38.8 (29-44.1) %

Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Solar Bay Stress Test Stability; 1.0.17.4: Ø34.5 (28.6-47.1) %

Xiaomi 17T Pro Mali-G1 Ultra MC12, Dimensity 9500, 512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash; Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability; 1.0.6.2: Ø17.5 (14-23.5) %

Samsung Galaxy S26+ Xclipse 960, Exynos 2600, 256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash; Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability; 1.0.6.2: Ø17.3 (15-23.7) %

发言人

小米17T Pro的两个扬声器在中等音量下听起来相当悦耳，但若将音量调至最大，你会很快发现它们不仅在音量上，而且在音质精准度上都显得力不从心。

Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)

Xiaomi 17T Pro audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 6.6% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 6.6% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 24% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 67% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 34%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 44% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 48% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 23%, worst was 134%

Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (89.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14.3% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (11.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 0% of all tested devices in this class were better, 0% similar, 100% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 34%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 7% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 90% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 23%, worst was 134%

电池续航——7,000 mAh 带你直达续航天堂

功耗

功耗处于合理水平，尽管在屏幕亮度全开时略高。但在满载运行时，功耗却非常低。

17T Pro 支持最高 100 瓦的有线充电，45 分钟内即可充满电。无线充电最高支持 50 瓦。

Power Consumption

Off / Standby	0.05 / 0.38 Watt
Idle	0.89 / 1.67 / 1.73 Watt
Load	6.27 / 8.63 Watt


Key: min: , med: , max: Metrahit Energy

	Xiaomi 17T Pro 7000 mAh	Samsung Galaxy S26+ 4900 mAh	Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra 6500 mAh	Xiaomi 17 7000 mAh	Vivo X300 Pro 5440 mAh	Average MediaTek Dimensity 9500	Average of class Smartphone
Power Consumption		-22%	0%	2%	-48%	-23%	-4%
Idle Minimum * (Watt)	0.89	0.56 37%	0.87 2%	0.7 21%	0.86 3%	0.975 ?(0.6 - 1.7, n=6) -10%	0.885 ?(0.39 - 1.7, n=135, last 2 years) 1%
Idle Average * (Watt)	1.67	1.28 23%	1.29 23%	1.4 16%	1.8 -8%	1.765 ?(1 - 2.3, n=6) -6%	1.483 ?(0.7 - 4.36, n=135, last 2 years) 11%
Idle Maximum * (Watt)	1.73	1.31 24%	1.33 23%	1.7 2%	1.86 -8%	2.01 ?(1.3 - 2.6, n=6) -16%	1.671 ?(0.75 - 4.46, n=135, last 2 years) 3%
Load Average * (Watt)	6.27	12.38 -97%	8.84 -41%	5.9 6%	10.63 -70%	8 ?(6.27 - 10.6, n=5) -28%	6.73 ?(2.9 - 14.9, n=95, last 2 years) -7%
Load Maximum * (Watt)	8.63	16.9 -96%	9.15 -6%	11.7 -36%	21.99 -155%	13.3 ?(8.63 - 22, n=5) -54%	11.2 ?(4.75 - 22, n=95, last 2 years) -30%

* ... smaller is better

功耗：Geekbench（150 cd/m²）

Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø6.89 (1.045-12.9) Watt

Vivo X300 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500; Geekbench 5.5 Power Consumption 150cd: Ø6.69 (0.09289-15.2) Watt

Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.963 (0.868-1.286) Watt

Vivo X300 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.117 (1.048-1.805) Watt

功耗：GFXbench（150 cd/m²）

Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø12.3 (11.3-12.8) Watt

Vivo X300 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø10.8 (10.6-10.9) Watt

Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø0.963 (0.868-1.286) Watt

Vivo X300 Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø1.117 (1.048-1.805) Watt

电池续航时间

得益于其7,000 mAh的电池，小米17T Pro在我们的Wi-Fi测试中续航时间约为26小时。这是一个非常不错的成绩，但小米17的表现表明，即使使用相同的电池，续航时间还能更长。

Battery Runtime


WiFi Websurfing (Chrome 150)		25h 59min

Battery runtime - WiFi v1.3
Xiaomi 17T Pro 7000 mAh	26 h
Vivo X300 FE 6500 mAh	24.8 h
Samsung Galaxy S26+ 4900 mAh	17.8 h
Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra 6500 mAh	21.9 h
Xiaomi 17 7000 mAh	30.9 h

Notebookcheck 综合评分

小米17T Pro最令人印象深刻的是其超长的续航时间、卓越的性能、出色的显示屏以及强大的摄像头；然而，它仍然存在一些本可避免的缺点，例如USB 2.0接口、超广角摄像头表现欠佳，以及在高负载下出现性能降频现象。

Back to the verdict

Xiaomi 17T Pro - 07/23/2026 v8
Daniel Schmidt

Chassis

89%

Keyboard

67 / 75 → 89%

Pointing Device

94%

Connectivity

56 / 69 → 81%

Weight

88%

Battery

94%

Display

91%

Games Performance

44 / 55 → 79%

Application Performance

66 / 85 → 77%

AI Performance

22%

Temperature

88%

Noise

100%

Audio

72 / 90 → 79%

Camera

81%

Average

69%

86%

Smartphone - Weighted Average

CO2 Emissions
No Data

Materials
25%

Packaging
90%

Power Use
95.5%

Repairability
40%

Software Updates
94.5%

Total Sustainability Score: 57.5%

可能的替代方案比较

Image	Model / Review	Price	Weight	Drive	Display
1. 85.7%	Xiaomi 17T Pro MediaTek Dimensity 9500 ⎘ Arm Mali G1- Ultra MC12 ⎘ 12 GB Memory, 512 GB UFS 4.x	Amazon: $849.50 List Price: 1000€	219 g	512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	6.83" 2772x1280 447 PPI AMOLED
2. 86%	Vivo X300 FE Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5 ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 829 ⎘ 12 GB Memory, 512 GB UFS 4.x	Amazon: List Price: 899€	190.2 g	512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	6.31" 2640x1216 461 PPI AMOLED
3. 89%	Samsung Galaxy S26+ Samsung Exynos 2600 ⎘ Samsung Xclipse 960 ⎘ 12 GB Memory, 256 GB UFS 4.x	Amazon: List Price: 1249€	190 g	256 GB UFS 4.0 Flash	6.70" 3120x1440 513 PPI LTPO-AMOLED
4. 88.2%	Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 840 ⎘ 16 GB Memory, 512 GB UFS 4.x	Amazon: List Price: 900€	220 g	512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	6.90" 2608x1200 416 PPI AMOLED
5. 89.2%	Xiaomi 17 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 ⎘ Qualcomm Adreno 840 ⎘ 12 GB Memory, 512 GB UFS 4.x	Amazon: 1. $969.99 XIAOMI 17 5G Ai (Compatible ... 2. $830.00 XIAOMI 17T PRO Ai 5G (Compat... 3. $1,250.97 XIAOMI 17 Ultra Ai 5G (Compa... List Price: 650€	191 g	512 GB UFS 4.1 Flash	6.30" 2656x1220 464 PPI LTPO AMOLED

Transparency

The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was given to the author by the manufacturer free of charge for the purposes of review. There was no third-party influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review. 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.

Add as a preferred source on Google

一款让你忘记其价格的旗舰机型——小米17T Pro评测

价格胜过声望。

小米17T Pro评测

Pros

Cons

价格与供货情况

Table of Contents

规格参数：小米17T Pro

案例——小米手机通过IP68认证

尺寸对比

产品特性——小米17T Pro仅支持USB 2.0

软件——17T Pro 也将获得 Android 21 系统更新

可持续发展

通信与GNSS——配备超强Wi-Fi 7功能的智能手机

手机功能与通话质量

相机——17T Pro 搭载的强大徕卡三摄组合

配件与保修——不包含电源适配器，但包含保护套

输入设备与操作——17T Pro 配备光学指纹传感器

显示屏——亮度高且色彩准确的AMOLED屏幕，支持直流调光

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

Display Response Times

性能——小米17T Pro搭载的Dimensity 9500

排放量——在满载状态下，其表现逊于Exynos

温度

3DMark 压力测试

发言人

Xiaomi 17T Pro audio analysis

Xiaomi Poco F8 Ultra audio analysis

电池续航——7,000 mAh 带你直达续航天堂

功耗

功耗：Geekbench（150 cd/m²）

功耗：GFXbench（150 cd/m²）

电池续航时间

Notebookcheck 综合评分

可能的替代方案比较

Transparency

More articles related to this device

Related Articles