Notebookcheck

诺基亚 8 智能手机简短评测

Manuel Masiero (translated by Kangfei Zheng), 11/16/2017
Android Touchscreen Smartphone

3个镜头。 通过诺基亚 8,HMD恢复了该芬兰传奇品牌,在高端手机领域的地位。在580欧元的价位下(约682美元,在某些网络零售店是565美元),用户可以获得一个制作精良的5.3英寸手机。它的双摄像头,拥有前所未有的特质。

Nokia 8
Processor
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
Graphics adapter
Qualcomm Adreno 540
Memory
4096 MB 
, LPPDDR4X
Display
5.3 inch 16:9, 2560x1440 pixel 554 PPI, 电容式, QHD, IPS, Corning Gorilla Glass 5, 2.5D Glass, glossy: yes
Storage
64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash, 64 GB 
, 49.9 GB free
Connections
1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, Audio Connections: 3.5毫米音频接口, Card Reader: micro-SD读卡器 高达256 GB, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: proximity sensor, accelerometer, e-compass, gyroscope, fingerprint scanner, Hall sensor, barometer, ANT+, Android Beam, DLNA, USB-OTG
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0, GSM (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz), UMTS (850, 900, 1900, 2100 MHz), LTE Cat.9 (band 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 20, 28, 38, 40, 41), downloads max. 450 MBit/s, uploads max. 50 MBit/s, head SAR 0.711 W/kg, body SAR 1.330 W/kg, LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 7.9 x 151.5 x 73.7
Battery
3090 mAh Lithium-Ion, Talk time 2G (according to manufacturer): 23.5 h, Talk time 3G (according to manufacturer): 23.5 h, Standby 2G (according to manufacturer): 208.8 h, Standby 3G (according to manufacturer): 208.8 h
Operating System
Android 7.1 Nougat
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix dual 13 MP, f/2.0, 1,12 µm, field of view 76.9°, dual-tone flash, OIS, PDAF, IR range finder
Secondary Camera: 13 MPix f/2.0, 1.12 µm, field of view 78.4˚, PDAF, screen flash
Additional features
Keyboard: 虚拟键盘, charger, charging/data cable, headset, quick start guide, SIM card slot tool, 24 Months Warranty, fanless
Weight
160 g, Power Supply: 35 g
Price
579 (~$565 in some US online retailers) Euro

 

Size Comparison

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Apple iPhone 8
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
915 MBit/s ∼100% +289%
HTC U11
Adreno 540, 835, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
394 MBit/s ∼43% +68%
OnePlus 5
Adreno 540, 835, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
371 MBit/s ∼41% +58%
Samsung Galaxy S8
Mali-G71 MP20, 8895 Octa, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
329 MBit/s ∼36% +40%
Nokia 8
Adreno 540, 835, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
235 MBit/s ∼26%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Galaxy S8
Mali-G71 MP20, 8895 Octa, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
651 MBit/s ∼100% +177%
HTC U11
Adreno 540, 835, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
639 MBit/s ∼98% +172%
OnePlus 5
Adreno 540, 835, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
539 MBit/s ∼83% +129%
Apple iPhone 8
A11 Bionic GPU, A11 Bionic, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
354 MBit/s ∼54% +51%
Nokia 8
Adreno 540, 835, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
235 MBit/s ∼36%
Nokia 8: total route
Nokia 8: total route
Nokia 8: turning point
Nokia 8: turning point
Nokia 8: bridge
Nokia 8: bridge
Garmin Edge 500: total route
Garmin Edge 500: total route
Garmin Edge 500: turning point
Garmin Edge 500: turning point
Garmin Edge 500: bridge
Garmin Edge 500: bridge

Image Comparison

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

Scene 1Scene 2Scene 3
click to load images
708
cd/m²
716
cd/m²
691
cd/m²
679
cd/m²
735
cd/m²
709
cd/m²
702
cd/m²
721
cd/m²
704
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 735 cd/m² Average: 707.2 cd/m² Minimum: 3.39 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 92 %
Center on Battery: 735 cd/m²
Contrast: 930:1 (Black: 0.79 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.7 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 8.3 | - Ø
Gamma: 2.24
Nokia 8
IPS, 2560x1440, 5.3
OnePlus 5
AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.5
HTC U11
Super LCD5, 2560x1440, 5.5
Samsung Galaxy S8
Super AMOLED, 2960x1440, 5.8
Apple iPhone 8
IPS True Tone, 1334x750, 4.7
Screen
30%
34%
26%
39%
Brightness
707
431
-39%
472
-33%
564
-20%
580
-18%
Brightness Distribution
92
93
1%
90
-2%
94
2%
91
-1%
Black Level *
0.79
0.33
58%
0.44
44%
Contrast
930
1461
57%
1373
48%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
6.7
1.6
76%
3.2
52%
2.7
60%
1.2
82%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
8.3
1.7
80%
2.2
73%
3.1
63%
1.6
81%
Gamma
2.24 107%
2.25 107%
2.22 108%
2.15 112%
2.25 107%
CCT
8906 73%
6329 103%
6581 99%
6335 103%
6688 97%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
81.57
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
99.87

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM detected 2358 Hz17 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 2358 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 17 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 2358 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 54 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8581 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
13.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 3.6 ms rise
↘ 9.6 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 8 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (26.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
26.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 7.2 ms rise
↘ 19.2 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 9 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (42.5 ms).
AnTuTu Benchmark v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
Nokia 8
177018 Points ∼78%
OnePlus 5
177156 Points ∼78% 0%
HTC U11
175032 Points ∼77% -1%
Samsung Galaxy S8
171884 Points ∼75% -3%
Apple iPhone 8
204270 Points ∼90% +15%
PCMark for Android
Work 2.0 performance score (sort by value)
Nokia 8
6959 Points ∼68%
OnePlus 5
6579 Points ∼64% -5%
HTC U11
6828 Points ∼66% -2%
Samsung Galaxy S8
5370 Points ∼52% -23%
Work performance score (sort by value)
Nokia 8
8282 Points ∼97%
OnePlus 5
7826 Points ∼92% -6%
HTC U11
8295 Points ∼97% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S8
6035 Points ∼71% -27%
BaseMark OS II
Web (sort by value)
Nokia 8
1262 Points ∼74%
OnePlus 5
1287 Points ∼76% +2%
HTC U11
1221 Points ∼72% -3%
Samsung Galaxy S8
1156 Points ∼68% -8%
Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 8
5958 Points ∼64%
OnePlus 5
6144 Points ∼66% +3%
HTC U11
5976 Points ∼65% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S8
6096 Points ∼66% +2%
Memory (sort by value)
Nokia 8
3540 Points ∼80%
OnePlus 5
4423 Points ∼100% +25%
HTC U11
2085 Points ∼47% -41%
Samsung Galaxy S8
3039 Points ∼69% -14%
System (sort by value)
Nokia 8
5671 Points ∼55%
OnePlus 5
5902 Points ∼57% +4%
HTC U11
5570 Points ∼54% -2%
Samsung Galaxy S8
5386 Points ∼52% -5%
Overall (sort by value)
Nokia 8
3505 Points ∼92%
OnePlus 5
3790 Points ∼100% +8%
HTC U11
3034 Points ∼80% -13%
Samsung Galaxy S8
3277 Points ∼86% -7%
Geekbench 4.1/4.2
Compute RenderScript Score (sort by value)
OnePlus 5
8005 Points ∼93%
HTC U11
8281 Points ∼97%
Samsung Galaxy S8
8490 Points ∼99%
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
Nokia 8
6479 Points ∼26%
OnePlus 5
6799 Points ∼27% +5%
HTC U11
6443 Points ∼26% -1%
Samsung Galaxy S8
6711 Points ∼27% +4%
Apple iPhone 8
10380 Points ∼41% +60%
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
Nokia 8
1924 Points ∼32%
OnePlus 5
1973 Points ∼33% +3%
HTC U11
1906 Points ∼32% -1%
Samsung Galaxy S8
1997 Points ∼34% +4%
Apple iPhone 8
4162 Points ∼70% +116%
3DMark
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 8
3010 Points ∼98%
OnePlus 5
3026 Points ∼98% +1%
HTC U11
2841 Points ∼92% -6%
Samsung Galaxy S8
2494 Points ∼81% -17%
Apple iPhone 8
1989 Points ∼65% -34%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 8
3894 Points ∼72%
OnePlus 5
3757 Points ∼70% -4%
HTC U11
3883 Points ∼72% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S8
3472 Points ∼64% -11%
Apple iPhone 8
2581 Points ∼48% -34%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
Nokia 8
3655 Points ∼94%
OnePlus 5
3566 Points ∼92% -2%
HTC U11
3590 Points ∼92% -2%
Samsung Galaxy S8
3194 Points ∼82% -13%
Apple iPhone 8
2421 Points ∼62% -34%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 8
3002 Points ∼97%
OnePlus 5
3012 Points ∼98% 0%
HTC U11
2832 Points ∼92% -6%
Samsung Galaxy S8
2440 Points ∼79% -19%
Apple iPhone 8
1774 Points ∼58% -41%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
Nokia 8
5818 Points ∼75%
OnePlus 5
4765 Points ∼62% -18%
HTC U11
5877 Points ∼76% +1%
Samsung Galaxy S8
4923 Points ∼64% -15%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
Nokia 8
4814 Points ∼97%
OnePlus 5
4219 Points ∼85% -12%
HTC U11
4744 Points ∼95% -1%
Samsung Galaxy S8
4015 Points ∼81% -17%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
Nokia 8
20951 Points ∼29%
OnePlus 5
19411 Points ∼27% -7%
HTC U11
20140 Points ∼28% -4%
Samsung Galaxy S8
21543 Points ∼30% +3%
Apple iPhone 8
24131 Points ∼34% +15%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
Nokia 8
56531 Points ∼12%
OnePlus 5
58001 Points ∼13% +3%
HTC U11
55725 Points ∼12% -1%
Samsung Galaxy S8
36347 Points ∼8% -36%
Apple iPhone 8
112424 Points ∼25% +99%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
Nokia 8
40968 Points ∼21%
OnePlus 5
40229 Points ∼20% -2%
HTC U11
40014 Points ∼20% -2%
Samsung Galaxy S8
31532 Points ∼16% -23%
Apple iPhone 8
62006 Points ∼31% +51%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
1920x1080 T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Nokia 8
99 fps ∼7%
OnePlus 5
115 fps ∼8% +16%
HTC U11
91 fps ∼7% -8%
Samsung Galaxy S8
121 fps ∼9% +22%
Apple iPhone 8
161.3 fps ∼12% +63%
T-Rex HD Onscreen C24Z16 (sort by value)
Nokia 8
54 fps ∼12%
OnePlus 5
60 fps ∼13% +11%
HTC U11
58 fps ∼13% +7%
Samsung Galaxy S8
60 fps ∼13% +11%
Apple iPhone 8
119.8 fps ∼26% +122%
GFXBench 3.0
off screen Manhattan Offscreen OGL (sort by value)
Nokia 8
51 fps ∼9%
OnePlus 5
61 fps ∼11% +20%
HTC U11
51 fps ∼9% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S8
62 fps ∼11% +22%
Apple iPhone 8
70.8 fps ∼13% +39%
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
Nokia 8
31 fps ∼8%
OnePlus 5
56 fps ∼15% +81%
HTC U11
29 fps ∼8% -6%
Samsung Galaxy S8
41 fps ∼11% +32%
Apple iPhone 8
114.5 fps ∼31% +269%
GFXBench 3.1
off screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 8
36 fps ∼9%
OnePlus 5
42 fps ∼10% +17%
HTC U11
33 fps ∼8% -8%
Samsung Galaxy S8
24 fps ∼6% -33%
Apple iPhone 8
54 fps ∼13% +50%
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 8
17 fps ∼10%
OnePlus 5
41 fps ∼23% +141%
HTC U11
15 fps ∼9% -12%
Samsung Galaxy S8
23 fps ∼13% +35%
Apple iPhone 8
109.7 fps ∼62% +545%
GFXBench 4.0
off screen Car Chase Offscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 8
24 fps ∼7%
OnePlus 5
25 fps ∼7% +4%
HTC U11
24 fps ∼7% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S8
25 fps ∼7% +4%
on screen Car Chase Onscreen (sort by value)
Nokia 8
13 fps ∼0%
OnePlus 5
25 fps ∼1% +92%
HTC U11
13 fps ∼0% 0%
Samsung Galaxy S8
13 fps ∼0% 0%

Legend

 
Nokia 8 Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
OnePlus 5 Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
HTC U11 Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy S8 Samsung Exynos 8895 Octa, ARM Mali-G71 MP20, 64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
 
Apple iPhone 8 Apple A11 Bionic, Apple A11 Bionic GPU, Apple 256 GB (iPhone 8 / Plus)
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Apple iPhone 8
206.7 Points ∼100% +226%
OnePlus 5 (Chrome 59)
71.6 Points ∼35% +13%
HTC U11 (Chrome 58)
69.51 Points ∼34% +10%
Samsung Galaxy S8 (Samsung Browser 5.2)
65.846 Points ∼32% +4%
Nokia 8 (Chrome 61.0.3163.98)
63.365 Points ∼31%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPhone 8
34163 Points ∼100% +207%
Samsung Galaxy S8 (Samsung Browser 5.2)
12941 Points ∼38% +16%
OnePlus 5 (Chrome 59)
11945 Points ∼35% +7%
HTC U11 (Chrome 58)
11781 Points ∼34% +6%
Nokia 8 (Chrome 61.0.3163.98)
11131 Points ∼33%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Nokia 8 (Chrome 61.0.3163.98)
3159.8 ms * ∼100%
HTC U11 (Chrome 58)
2760.3 ms * ∼87% +13%
OnePlus 5 (Chrome 59)
2621.7 ms * ∼83% +17%
Samsung Galaxy S8 (Samsung Browser 5.2)
1886.6 ms * ∼60% +40%
Apple iPhone 8
730.8 ms * ∼23% +77%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall Score
Apple iPhone 8
359 Points ∼100% +106%
Samsung Galaxy S8 (Samsung Browser 5.2)
194 Points ∼54% +11%
Nokia 8 (Chrome 61.0.3163.98)
174 Points ∼48%
HTC U11 (Chrome 58)
162 Points ∼45% -7%
OnePlus 5 (Chrome 59)
161 Points ∼45% -7%

* ... smaller is better

Nokia 8OnePlus 5HTC U11Samsung Galaxy S8
AndroBench 3-5
10%
67%
-1%
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard
51.66 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
46.25 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-10%
53.5 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
4%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard
76.85 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501)
68.82 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-10%
63.9 (Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
-17%
Random Write 4KB
14.57
19.3
32%
79.97
449%
15.25
5%
Random Read 4KB
145.73
141
-3%
91.45
-37%
127.17
-13%
Sequential Write 256KB
199.15
201.5
1%
206.41
4%
193.23
-3%
Sequential Read 256KB
680.39
748
10%
717.33
5%
792.86
17%
Dead Trigger 2
 SettingsValue
 high60 fps
in comparison
Motorola Moto X Play (min)
 615 MSM8939, Adreno 405
20
   ...
Sony Xperia XZ Premium
 835, Adreno 540
60
OnePlus 5
 835, Adreno 540
60
   ...
Nokia 8 (max)
 835, Adreno 540
60
Asphalt 8: Airborne
 SettingsValue
 high30 fps
 very low30 fps
Max. Load
 39.2 °C38.1 °C43.2 °C 
 39.7 °C39.5 °C45.1 °C 
 39.4 °C38.1 °C40.6 °C 
Maximum: 45.1 °C
Average: 40.3 °C
35.9 °C36.9 °C38.3 °C
36.6 °C37 °C38 °C
36.3 °C37.4 °C38.1 °C
Maximum: 38.3 °C
Average: 37.2 °C
Power Supply (max.)  29.9 °C | Room Temperature 21.5 °C | Voltcraft IR-260
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2031.629.52525.435.93125.3304032.930.65033.634.46331.636.68028.437.41002741.412520.8411602243.720021.346.125020.853.331521.256.440019.460.150019.563.363017.764.480017.961.7100017.867.3125017.373.6160017.474.1200016.775.8250017.278.6315018.281.8400017.982.4500017.686.6630017.783.8800017.879.51000017.977.91250018.1791600018.269.6SPL3091.6N1.382median 17.9Nokia 8median 69.6Delta1.311.631.639.125.437.625.336.932.940.833.635.231.633.328.433.82733.520.842.82250.821.351.520.849.821.253.919.45619.558.717.761.617.962.917.866.217.368.217.468.416.768.517.267.318.26817.969.817.668.817.767.517.861.717.959.118.160.618.256.23078.41.343.6median 17.9Apple iPhone 8median 61.61.37.531.635.125.433.525.334.832.93433.629.431.629.628.424.92731.220.834.72239.821.348.320.855.321.259.519.462.219.567.117.77017.973.617.874.217.373.217.472.716.773.217.272.118.269.717.96917.666.317.766.917.86717.951.618.145.218.247.73082.41.354.8median 17.9Samsung Galaxy S8median 66.91.311.8hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Nokia 8 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (91.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.7% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (6.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5.7% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 11.9% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 29% of all tested devices in this class were better, 12% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 58% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 34% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Apple iPhone 8 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (78.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.1% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 2% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 23% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 72% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Samsung Galaxy S8 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.44 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (21.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 13% of all tested devices in this class were better, 13% similar, 73% worse
» The best had a delta of 14%, average was 26%, worst was 44%
Compared to all devices tested
» 48% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 45% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.04 / 0.5 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 0.86 / 2.13 / 2.16 Watt
Load midlight 4.65 / 9.99 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Nokia 8
3090 mAh
OnePlus 5
3300 mAh
HTC U11
3000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S8
3000 mAh
Apple iPhone 8
1821 mAh
Power Consumption
9%
11%
33%
29%
Idle Minimum *
0.86
0.73
15%
0.73
15%
0.78
9%
0.54
37%
Idle Average *
2.13
1.44
32%
1.96
8%
1.1
48%
1.63
23%
Idle Maximum *
2.16
1.5
31%
1.98
8%
1.16
46%
1.67
23%
Load Average *
4.65
6.91
-49%
4.82
-4%
4.15
11%
2.74
41%
Load Maximum *
9.99
8.51
15%
7.15
28%
5.12
49%
7.78
22%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
25h 06min
WiFi Surfing v1.3
10h 50min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
12h 13min
Load (maximum brightness)
3h 57min
Nokia 8
3090 mAh
OnePlus 5
3300 mAh
HTC U11
3000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy S8
3000 mAh
Apple iPhone 8
1821 mAh
Battery Runtime
-7%
-19%
10%
-6%
Reader / Idle
1506
1534
2%
1250
-17%
1667
11%
1629
8%
H.264
733
623
-15%
498
-32%
771
5%
698
-5%
WiFi v1.3
650
518
-20%
560
-14%
719
11%
585
-10%
Load
237
247
4%
212
-11%
264
11%
202
-15%

Pros

+ 非常明亮的屏幕
+ 良好质量
+ 快速系统芯片
+ 纯净Android 7.1.1
+ 非常好的GPS定位功能
+ 优秀的相机
+ 可用立体声录制视频
+ USB 3.1 Gen.1
+ 电池续航长
+ 快速充电3.0

Cons

- 不防水或防尘
- 平庸的Wi-Fi速度
- 没有千兆LTE
- LTE频段相对较少
In review: Nokia 8 courtesy of Notebooksbilliger.de
In review: Nokia 8 courtesy of Notebooksbilliger.de

Nokia 8的出彩之处在于,制作精良的铝制外壳,以及明亮的5.3英寸的超高清屏幕。而在高通骁龙 835的使用上,也获得了一些同情分。4 GB的内存,和快速Adreno 540集成显卡,确保了系统的快速运行。该机的续航时间也很长。快速充电 3.0技术与“Bothie”这个卖点结合,1300万像素的摄像头,可以同时拍照和摄影。可运行分屏模式。支持4K分辨率摄影,支持基于3个麦克风的360度环绕音。

Nokia 8 是一台高端智能手机,,它在各个方面都很优秀。紧跟了Apple iphone 8或者三星 Galaxy S8的步伐。然而,它还是不足以与最强劲的对手匹敌。

撇开诺基亚 8的那个可以吸引到用户的创新拍照方式,它仍然是一个非常好的智能手机。但是,一些小的不足阻碍了它的步伐。例如,缺乏等级为IP67的防护能力,不能防止水和灰尘进入手机。我们也希望该机有一个可以支持更多频段的快速LTE模块。一个或几个频段的缺失,阻碍了它成为一个真正的环球使用的手机的可能。与高端竞品相比,Wi-Fi传输速度并不是很让人满意。

除了我们测试的这台支持单SIM卡的机型,诺基亚也有双SIM卡型号可供选择。而128 GB存储空间的机型也会很快发布。截止到目前,相关信息还无法在诺基亚德文网站上获取。

注:本文是基于完整评测的缩减版本,阅读完整的英文评测,请点击这里

Nokia 8 - 10/19/2017 v6
Manuel Masiero

Chassis
88%
Keyboard
71 / 75 → 94%
Pointing Device
90%
Connectivity
48 / 60 → 80%
Weight
91%
Battery
93%
Display
83%
Games Performance
64 / 63 → 100%
Application Performance
68 / 70 → 98%
Temperature
85%
Noise
100%
Audio
71 / 91 → 78%
Camera
75%
Average
79%
87%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebookcheck中文版(NBC中国) > 评测 > 诺基亚 8 智能手机简短评测
Manuel Masiero, 2017-11-16 (Update: 2017-11-16)