结论--强大的中期冠军,但也有一些弱点
三星Galaxy A56 5G 为中端市场提供了均衡的整体解决方案。其全新的 Exynos 处理器具有良好的日常性能和效率,给人留下了深刻印象。搭配大容量电池,A56 的续航时间令人印象深刻。全新的设计使这款智能手机看起来更加独特,同时又不失与Galaxy 家族的联系。此外,它现在更轻薄,显示屏更亮,充电速度也得到了改善。最后但并非最不重要的一点是,它的更新交付期已延长至六年。
在背面摄像头方面,三星没有取得任何进展。在这方面,竞争对手有时会更胜一筹,但总的来说,三星仍能提供不错的质量。遗憾的是,该机不能再使用 microSD 卡,尤其是买家无法选择更大的存储配置。此外,A56 还缺少 6 GHz WLAN、无线充电和 UWB 功能。
Pros
Cons
价格和供应情况
您可以从亚马逊等主要在线零售商处订购Galaxy A56 5G,目前售价为 411.35 美元。
Table of Contents
- 结论--强大的中期冠军,但也有一些弱点
- 规格:三星Galaxy A56 5G
- 保护壳 -Galaxy A56 采用大猩猩 Glas Victus+ 保护壳,防护等级达到 IP67。
- 连接性 -Galaxy A56 不再使用 microSD
- 软件 -Android 15,六年更新一次
- 通信和全球导航卫星系统 - 仍未配备 6 GHz 无线局域网
- 电话功能和通话质量 - A56 上的双 eSIM 卡
- 摄像头 - 现在可拍摄 HDR 视频
- 配件和保修 -Galaxy A56 的配件不多
- 输入设备和操作 - A56 上的光学指纹扫描仪
- 显示屏 -Galaxy A56 配备更亮的 Super AMOLED 显示屏
- 性能 -Galaxy A56 内的全新 Exynos 1580
- 游戏 - 带有 HFR 游戏功能的三星手机
- 排放 - 可能会很热,但保持稳定
- 电池寿命 - 5,000 毫安时的三星智能手机
- Notebookcheck 总评分
- 可能的替代品比较
三星Galaxy A56 5G 是继去年的 Galaxy A55 5G.三星为其中档旗舰手机增添了一系列新功能。有些功能比较明显,比如它的设计,但 A56 在内部也进行了更新。
这款智能手机有两种存储配置:8/128 GB 和 8/256 GB,售价分别约为 370 美元和 410 美元。A56 发布时的 MRSP 为 499.99 美元,比上一代产品更便宜。
规格:三星Galaxy A56 5G
» Notebookcheck多媒体笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck游戏笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck低价办公/商务笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck高端办公/商务笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck工作站笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck亚笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck超级本产品Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck变形本产品Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck平板电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck智能手机Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck评测过最出色的笔记本电脑屏幕
» Notebookcheck售价500欧元以下笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck售价300欧元以下笔记本电脑Top 10排名
保护壳 -Galaxy A56 采用大猩猩 Glas Victus+ 保护壳,防护等级达到 IP67。
Galaxy A56 5G 的长度和宽度都略有增加,但机身更加纤薄,重量也减轻了 15 克。它有浅灰、橄榄、粉红和石墨四种配色。我们的测试设备是后者。
由于采用了拉丝铝边框,这款三星手机给人留下了极具吸引力的高品质印象。机身两侧再次采用康宁大猩猩 Victus+ 玻璃保护。所有缝隙都紧密而均匀,A56 完全不会受到扭曲的影响。与前代产品一样,这款手机通过了 IP67 认证,具有防水和防尘功能。
虽然它的显示屏边框仍然不是最薄的,但却再次变窄了,显示屏与表面的比例提高到了 88%,这是相当不错的。屏幕 A55只有 86%。
连接性 -Galaxy A56 不再使用 microSD
软件 -Android 15,六年更新一次
可持续性
三星将其智能手机包装在一个轻薄的无塑料盒中,而且现在还取消了手机边框周围的铝箔。关于Galaxy A56 使用了哪些可回收原材料,目前还没有确切的信息,不过三星的可持续发展报告中提供了该款智能手机的二氧化碳排放量数据。
与其他机型一样,A56 也提供备件和维修说明。
通信和全球导航卫星系统 - 仍未配备 6 GHz 无线局域网
今年,手机的通信模块没有取得任何进展。Galaxy A56 5G 支持所有现代蜂窝标准,频段支持良好,我们在大城市进行测试时没有遇到接收问题。
这款手机使用 Wi-Fi 6,但仍只能在 2.4 和 5.0 GHz 频率范围内使用。与华硕 ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000 参考路由器一起使用时,传输速率很稳定,但还可以再高一些。
Networking | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
Average 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax | |
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 | |
尽管是单频连接,但这款智能手机的卫星定位功能速度超快,精确度令人印象深刻。在室内,最初只需要稍长一点时间,但Galaxy A56 随后需要一段时间才能缩小精确定位范围。
我们将三星智能手机与 Garmin Venu 2健身智能手表进行了比较。A56很好地记录了我们的路线,完全可以胜任导航任务。
电话功能和通话质量 - A56 上的双 eSIM 卡
总的来说,三星Galaxy A56 5G 的通话质量在日常使用中感觉很自然,能有效过滤掉大部分环境噪音。不过,在嘈杂的环境中,该设备会面临一些限制:有时会有干扰噪音传入,导致用户的声音听起来有点闷和刺耳。但总的来说,它的通话质量还是不错的。使用免提模式时,语音传输清晰,但与将手机举到耳边时相比,声音听起来略显沉闷。
Galaxy A56 支持 WLAN 通话(VoWiFi)和 VoLTE 等常用功能。可使用 Nano SIM 卡和 eSIM 卡进行双 SIM 操作。
摄像头 - 现在可拍摄 HDR 视频
三星Galaxy A56 5G 的前置摄像头采用了新的传感器,虽然分辨率低于前代产品,但拍照效果却更好。三星尤其改进了色彩平衡。
从硬件角度看,三星没有对背面的三摄像头做任何改动,软件方面的更新也保持在最低水平。手机主摄像头拍摄的照片效果不错,但细节还可以再丰富一些,比如在 "Nothing Phone (3a) "上。 Nothing Phone (3a).在弱光环境下,如果不把亮度调得那么高,肯定会对照片有好处。
超广角摄像头的工作相当出色,专用微距镜头也是如此。用户只能进行数字变焦,但放大两倍以内的照片仍然可用。不过,如果放大到更近的距离,照片就会显得模糊不清。它的最大数码变焦为 10 倍(230 毫米)。
可使用前置摄像头、主镜头和超广角摄像头录制视频。所有三个镜头都支持超高清、全高清和 30fps 的高清;如果要以 60fps 的速度拍摄,则只能使用主传感器拍摄 1,080p 的视频。其 HDR 视频支持是一项新功能,可用于前置和后置摄像头。
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 cameraMain cameraUltra-wide angle5x zoomLow-light
在可控的光线条件下,Galaxy A56 5G 的色彩平衡非常和谐,没有任何明显的异常。
这款手机在全分辨率下很好地再现了我们的测试图,仅在细节部分显示出轻微的锐度不足,边缘的噪点稍多一些。


配件和保修 -Galaxy A56 的配件不多
三星Galaxy A56 5G 的供货范围仅包括 SIM 卡工具和 USB-C 数据线。配套的电源和手机壳可直接从三星公司购买,但第三方供应商的价格通常更便宜。
手机享有 12 个月的标准保修服务,可通过Samsung Care+ 延长保修期。保修范围包括设备本身的损坏和失窃。保修期为 24 个月,费用在 129 美元到 349 美元之间。
输入设备和操作 - A56 上的光学指纹扫描仪
显示屏 -Galaxy A56 配备更亮的 Super AMOLED 显示屏
|
Brightness Distribution: 99 %
Center on Battery: 1184 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.7 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.86
ΔE Greyscale 2.4 | 0.09-98 Ø5.1
99.1% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.12
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G Super AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.7" | Samsung Galaxy A55 5G Super AMOLED, 2340x1080, 6.6" | Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G AMOLED, 2712x1220, 6.7" | Apple iPhone 16e OLED, 2532x1170, 6.1" | Motorola Edge 50 Pro P-OLED, 2712x1220, 6.7" | Nothing Phone (3a) Pro AMOLED, 2392x1080, 6.8" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Screen | 4% | 16% | 21% | 6% | 8% | |
Brightness middle | 1184 | 962 -19% | 1210 2% | 833 -30% | 1064 -10% | 1318 11% |
Brightness | 1179 | 967 -18% | 1222 4% | 837 -29% | 1038 -12% | 1306 11% |
Brightness Distribution | 99 | 99 0% | 92 -7% | 99 0% | 88 -11% | 98 -1% |
Black Level * | ||||||
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.7 | 1.6 6% | 1 41% | 0.7 59% | 1.17 31% | 1.5 12% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 3.2 | 2.6 19% | 2.7 16% | 1.6 50% | 2.47 23% | 2.9 9% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.4 | 1.5 37% | 1.5 37% | 0.6 75% | 2 17% | 2.3 4% |
Gamma | 2.12 104% | 2.13 103% | 2.25 98% | 2.19 100% | 2.238 98% | 2.26 97% |
CCT | 6544 99% | 6382 102% | 6509 100% | 6525 100% | 6423 101% | 6819 95% |
* ... smaller is better
Display / APL18 Peak Brightness | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | |
Apple iPhone 16e |
Display / HDR Peak Brightness | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Apple iPhone 16e |
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 120 Hz Amplitude: 14.29 % Secondary Frequency: 240 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 8437 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
固定缩放级别和不同亮度设置下的测量系列(最低亮度下的振幅曲线看起来很平,但这是缩放造成的。信息框显示的是最小亮度下的振幅放大图)。
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
1.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.616 ms rise | |
↘ 0.581 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 (20.7 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
1.15 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.5805 ms rise | |
↘ 0.565 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 (32.3 ms). |
性能 -Galaxy A56 内的全新 Exynos 1580
Galaxy A56 采用三星自己的 Exynos 1580与前代产品相比,它使用了更先进的 Cortex 内核,因此 CPU 性能更高。
在我们的测试中,该系统芯片明显领先于大多数竞争对手,但它无法与 iPhone 16e's Apple A18或 Pixel 9a 的 张量 G4.
UL Procyon AI Inference for Android - Overall Score NNAPI | |
Average of class Smartphone (1267 - 81594, n=149, last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (10741 - 11181, n=2) | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G |
Geekbench AI | |
Single Precision TensorFlow NNAPI 1.2 | |
Average of class Smartphone (51 - 1501, n=43, last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (n=1) | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
Half Precision TensorFlow NNAPI 1.2 | |
Average of class Smartphone (51 - 9453, n=42, last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (n=1) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
Quantized TensorFlow NNAPI 1.2 | |
Average of class Smartphone (123 - 13084, n=42, last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (n=1) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G |
图形计算由集成的 Xclipse 540 执行,与去年的机型相比,性能有了明显提升,但仍不支持光线追踪。
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7: T-Rex Onscreen | 1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen
GFXBench 3.0: on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL | 1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
GFXBench 3.1: on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen | 1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
GFXBench: on screen Car Chase Onscreen | 1920x1080 Car Chase Offscreen | on screen Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen | 2560x1440 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen | on screen Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen | 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen | 3840x2160 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G |
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G |
3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G |
3DMark / Steel Nomad Light Unlimited Score | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G |
3DMark / Steel Nomad Light Score | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G |
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro |
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro |
GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G |
GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G |
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G |
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G |
GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G |
GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G |
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G |
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G |
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G |
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G |
GFXBench / 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G |
在Galaxy A56 上浏览网页非常方便快捷。在基准测试中,与竞争对手相比,A56 总是名列前茅;在这方面,只有 iPhone 16e 能与之媲美。
Jetstream 2 - 2.0 Total Score | |
Apple iPhone 16e (Safari 18) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (n=1) | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G (Chrome 134) | |
Average of class Smartphone (13.8 - 387, n=165, last 2 years) | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro (chrome 134) | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Chrome 123) | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro (Chrome 124) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G (Chrome 132) |
Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
Apple iPhone 16e (Safari 18) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (191 - 194, n=2) | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G (Chrome 134) | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro (chrome 135) | |
Average of class Smartphone (15.2 - 569, n=147, last 2 years) | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro (Chrome 124) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G (Chrome 132) | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Chrome 123) |
Speedometer 3.0 - Score | |
Apple iPhone 16e (Safari 18) | |
Average of class Smartphone (1.03 - 34, n=96, last 2 years) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (12 - 12.3, n=2) | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G (Chrome 134) | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro (chrome 135) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G (Chrome 132) | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro (Chrome 124) | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Chrome 123) |
WebXPRT 4 - Overall | |
Apple iPhone 16e (Safari 18) | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G (Chrome 134) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (138 - 138, n=2) | |
Average of class Smartphone (22 - 273, n=157, last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Chrome 123) | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro (chrome 134) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G (Chrome 132) | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro (Chrome 124) |
Octane V2 - Total Score | |
Apple iPhone 16e (Safari 18) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (50719 - 50864, n=2) | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G (Chrome 134) | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro (chrome 134) | |
Average of class Smartphone (2228 - 100368, n=207, last 2 years) | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Chrome 123) | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro (Chrome 124) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G (Chrome 132) |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
Average of class Smartphone (277 - 28190, n=166, last 2 years) | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro (Chrome 124) | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G (Chrome 132) | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G (Chrome 123) | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro (chrome 134) | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G (Chrome 134) | |
Average Samsung Exynos 1580 (791 - 793, n=2) | |
Apple iPhone 16e (Safari 18) |
* ... smaller is better
与前代机型相比,三星提高了 UFS 3.1 存储的写入率,尽管Galaxy A56 仍无法充分发挥这种快速存储的潜力。
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | Motorola Edge 50 Pro | Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | Average 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AndroBench 3-5 | 7% | -16% | 35% | 12% | 4% | 52% | |
Sequential Read 256KB | 1634.8 | 1688.53 3% | 992.72 -39% | 1023.6 -37% | 996.23 -39% | 1578 ? -3% | 2040 ? 25% |
Sequential Write 256KB | 999.95 | 831.44 -17% | 931.68 -7% | 1025.9 3% | 970.63 -3% | 736 ? -26% | 1655 ? 66% |
Random Read 4KB | 207.01 | 351.47 70% | 171.2 -17% | 337 63% | 255.89 24% | 242 ? 17% | 285 ? 38% |
Random Write 4KB | 184.08 | 132.11 -28% | 186.14 1% | 390.2 112% | 304.95 66% | 238 ? 29% | 326 ? 77% |
游戏 - 带有 HFR 游戏功能的三星手机
我们借助GameBench 分析了三星Galaxy A56 5G 的游戏性能。.在我们测试的所有游戏中,《死亡扳机 2》(Dead Trigger 2)等较老的游戏最高可达到 120fps。
对于图形要求较高的游戏,你必须降低细节级别以确保显示流畅。虽然在测试过程中显示效果基本流畅,但我们还是多次注意到一些小的卡顿,智能手机也变得非常热。最高细节模式甚至不适用于《PUBG Mobile》。
排放 - 可能会很热,但保持稳定
温度
在我们的测试中,在连续负载的情况下,它的表面温度在某些地方上升到了 49 °C,我们使用 Burnout 基准进行了模拟。虽然温度相对较高,但仍在可接受范围内。
另一方面,三星似乎能很好地将 SoC 的热量散发出去,因为它在压力测试中基本没有受到影响。
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 48.5 °C / 119 F, compared to the average of 35.1 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 63.7 °C for the class Smartphone.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 49 °C / 120 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.2 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 32.8 °C / 91 F.
3DMark stress tests
3DMark | |
Wild Life Stress Test Stability | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Wild Life Extreme Stress Test | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy A55 5G | |
Motorola Edge 50 Pro | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | |
Apple iPhone 16e | |
Steel Nomad Light Stress Test Stability | |
Nothing Phone (3a) Pro | |
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G | |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G | |
Apple iPhone 16e |
发言人
Galaxy A56 的两个扬声器提供了相当一般的音频体验,主要表现在全音量时,低频听起来有点弱,超高音调几乎听不到。
USB-C 可用于有线音频输出。蓝牙可用于无线,但音频编解码器范围有限。Galaxy A56 支持 Auracast。
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.1% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 8% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 32% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 36%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 52% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 40% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (90.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 25.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 5% lower than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 7% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 88% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 36%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 27% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 68% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
电池寿命 - 5,000 毫安时的三星智能手机
耗电量
三星改进了Galaxy A56 在闲置模式下的功耗,但在负载情况下功耗相当高。
有线状态下,三星智能手机的充电功率高达 45 瓦,名义上比Galaxy S25(25 瓦、4,000 毫安时)快。不过,由于 A56 的电池容量更大,这在日常使用中并没有什么区别。在我们的测试中,S25需要70分钟才能充满电,而A56需要71分钟(50%:21分钟,80%:38分钟,90%:48分钟)。与 A55相比,A56 的充电时间缩短了 12 分钟。这款中档智能手机不支持无线充电。
Off / Standby | ![]() ![]() |
Idle | ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Load |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | |
Key:
min: ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G 5000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A55 5G 5000 mAh | Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G 5110 mAh | Apple iPhone 16e 4005 mAh | Motorola Edge 50 Pro 4500 mAh | Nothing Phone (3a) Pro 5000 mAh | Average Samsung Exynos 1580 | Average of class Smartphone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | 5% | 17% | 8% | 16% | 25% | -28% | 5% | |
Idle Minimum * | 0.72 | 0.85 -18% | 1.07 -49% | 0.68 6% | 0.9 -25% | 0.89 -24% | 1.41 ? -96% | 0.872 ? -21% |
Idle Average * | 1.45 | 1.51 -4% | 1.26 13% | 1.89 -30% | 1.3 10% | 1.3 10% | 1.975 ? -36% | 1.415 ? 2% |
Idle Maximum * | 1.49 | 1.71 -15% | 1.28 14% | 1.93 -30% | 1.6 -7% | 1.33 11% | 2.2 ? -48% | 1.556 ? -4% |
Load Average * | 9.68 | 4.87 50% | 3.7 62% | 3.77 61% | 4.8 50% | 3.29 66% | 7.74 ? 20% | 7.04 ? 27% |
Load Maximum * | 13.39 | 11.73 12% | 7.52 44% | 9.04 32% | 6.7 50% | 4.76 64% | 10.6 ? 21% | 10.6 ? 21% |
* ... smaller is better
Power consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)
Power consumption: GFXbench (150 cd/m²)
运行时间
三星Galaxy A56 5G 的电池续航时间给人带来了惊喜,在我们的大多数测试中,它的续航时间都明显较长。不出所料,它在负载情况下的运行时间略短。
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G 5000 mAh | Samsung Galaxy A55 5G 5000 mAh | Xiaomi Redmi Note 14 Pro+ 5G 5110 mAh | Apple iPhone 16e 4005 mAh | Motorola Edge 50 Pro 4500 mAh | Nothing Phone (3a) Pro 5000 mAh | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | -20% | -25% | -6% | -18% | -1% | |
Reader / Idle | 3173 | 2202 -31% | 1433 -55% | 2842 -10% | 1895 -40% | |
H.264 | 2506 | 1511 -40% | 1109 -56% | 1460 -42% | 1120 -55% | |
WiFi v1.3 | 1199 | 1077 -10% | 1168 -3% | 1390 16% | 979 -18% | 1188 -1% |
Load | 215 | 220 2% | 249 16% | 244 13% | 302 40% |
Notebookcheck 总评分
三星Galaxy A56 5G 是一款功能强大的中端智能手机,它可能不会在所有方面都达到同类产品的最佳标准,但它确实提供了一个不错的整体解决方案。
Samsung Galaxy A56 5G
- 05/20/2025 v8
Daniel Schmidt
可能的替代品比较
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.