Notebookcheck Logo

HTC One A9s 智能手机简短评测

东方新事物? 台湾制造商HTC发布的One A9,是我们去年评测的One A9的后继产品,并且它价格更为实惠。 我们将会找出其中的变化。
Android ARM Smartphone Touchscreen
HTC One A9s (One Series)
Processor
Mediatek Helio P10 MT6755 8 x 2 GHz, Cortex-A53
Graphics adapter
ARM Mali-T860 MP2
Memory
3 GB 
Display
5.00 inch 16:9, 1280 x 720 pixel 294 PPI, 电容式触摸屏, IPS, 大猩猩玻璃, glossy: yes
Storage
32 GB eMMC Flash, 32 GB 
, 17.7 GB free
Connections
1 USB 2.0, Card Reader: microSD高达2TB, 1 Fingerprint Reader, NFC, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: 加速度计,光传感器,接近传感器,指南针
Networking
802.11a/b/g/n (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/), Bluetooth 4.2, GSM (850/​900/​1800/​1900), UMTS (850/​900/​1900/​2100), LTE (B1/​B3/​B7/​B8/​B20); Bandwidth (Download/​Upload): 300Mbps/​50Mbps (LTE), 42Mbps/​5.76Mbps (UMTS); SAR: 0.49 W/kg (head), LTE, GPS
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8 x 146.5 x 71.5
Battery
8.7 Wh, 2300 mAh Lithium-Ion, Talk time 3G (according to manufacturer): 13 h, Standby 3G (according to manufacturer): 432 h
Operating System
Android 6.0 Marshmallow
Camera
Primary Camera: 13 MPix ƒ/2.2 aperture, 28x3 mm focal length (74.4° wide angle), AF, LED flash, Videos @1080p/​30fps
Secondary Camera: 5 MPix ƒ/2.8 Blende und 33.7 mm Brennweite (65.3° Weitwinkel), Videos @1080p/​30fps
Additional features
Speakers: Lautsprecher an der Unterkante, Keyboard: 虚拟键盘, 电源适配器,USB线,耳机, Boost+, News Republic, 24 Months Warranty, FM 收音机, fanless
Weight
150 g, Power Supply: 49 g
Price
299 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

Size Comparison

151.8 mm 74.9 mm 9.85 mm 178 g146.5 mm 71.5 mm 8 mm 150 g146 mm 71 mm 7.3 mm 143 g144.5 mm 69.4 mm 7.7 mm 160 g144.8 mm 71 mm 7.3 mm 155 g141 mm 68.88 mm 8.45 mm 149 g148 mm 105 mm 1 mm 1.5 g

Connectivity

Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe (Klaus I211)
485 MBit/s +345%
Samsung Galaxy S7
Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
335 MBit/s +207%
HTC One A9s
Mali-T860 MP2, Helio P10 MT6755, 32 GB eMMC Flash
109 MBit/s
HTC Desire 10 Lifestyle
Adreno 305, 400 MSM8928, 32 GB eMMC Flash
104 MBit/s -5%
iperf3 receive AX12
Apple iPhone 7
A10 Fusion GPU, A10 Fusion, 128 GB NVMe (Klaus I211)
532 MBit/s +422%
Samsung Galaxy S7
Mali-T880 MP12, Exynos 8890, 32 GB UFS 2.0 Flash
281 MBit/s +175%
HTC One A9s
Mali-T860 MP2, Helio P10 MT6755, 32 GB eMMC Flash
102 MBit/s
HTC Desire 10 Lifestyle
Adreno 305, 400 MSM8928, 32 GB eMMC Flash
101 MBit/s -1%
GPS HTC One A9s – Overview
GPS HTC One A9s – Overview
GPS HTC One A9s – Bridge
GPS HTC One A9s – Bridge
GPS HTC One A9s – Forest
GPS HTC One A9s – Forest
GPS Garmin Edge 500 – Overview
GPS Garmin Edge 500 – Overview
GPS Garmin Edge 500 – Bridge
GPS Garmin Edge 500 – Bridge
GPS Garmin Edge 500 – Forest
GPS Garmin Edge 500 – Forest

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

Display

296
cd/m²
335
cd/m²
310
cd/m²
306
cd/m²
348
cd/m²
310
cd/m²
304
cd/m²
348
cd/m²
321
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 348 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 319.8 cd/m² Minimum: 10.4 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 85 %
Center on Battery: 348 cd/m²
Contrast: 1513:1 (Black: 0.23 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.5 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5
ΔE Greyscale 4 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
95.1% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.3
HTC One A9s
IPS, 1280x720, 5.00
OnePlus 2
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.50
Lenovo ZUK Z2
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.00
Gigaset ME
IPS, 1920x1080, 5.00
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
Super AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.20
HTC One A9
AMOLED, 1920x1080, 5.00
Screen
5%
-18%
-10%
31%
24%
Brightness middle
348
451
30%
512
47%
445
28%
378
9%
346
-1%
Brightness
320
446
39%
502
57%
456
43%
380
19%
349
9%
Brightness Distribution
85
90
6%
84
-1%
93
9%
91
7%
93
9%
Black Level *
0.23
0.3
-30%
0.58
-152%
0.38
-65%
Contrast
1513
1503
-1%
883
-42%
1171
-23%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
3.5
3.84
-10%
3.8
-9%
4.29
-23%
1.95
44%
1.55
56%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
6.4
11.2
-75%
7.89
-23%
3.09
52%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
4
3.97
1%
2.7
32%
4.97
-24%
1.86
53%
2.05
49%
Gamma
2.3 96%
2.46 89%
2.09 105%
2.57 86%
2.13 103%
2.15 102%
CCT
6527 100%
7283 89%
6076 107%
7625 85%
6376 102%
6267 104%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
58.07
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
90.14

* ... 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 not detected

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 18110 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) 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
26 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 5 ms rise
↘ 21 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 57 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
30 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 13 ms rise
↘ 17 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 33 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (33.9 ms).

Performance

AnTuTu v6 - Total Score (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
51330 Points
OnePlus 2
65936 Points +28%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
122513 Points +139%
Gigaset ME
54213 Points +6%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
41676 Points -19%
Geekbench 4.0
64 Bit Single-Core Score (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
711 Points
64 Bit Multi-Core Score (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
2936 Points
3DMark
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Score (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
10766 Points
OnePlus 2
22400 Points +108%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
29241 Points +172%
Gigaset ME
19445 Points +81%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
7903 Points -27%
HTC One A9
9163 Points -15%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics Score (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
10453 Points
OnePlus 2
31858 Points +205%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
32997 Points +216%
Gigaset ME
25016 Points +139%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
7542 Points -28%
HTC One A9
9015 Points -14%
1280x720 offscreen Ice Storm Unlimited Physics (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
12025 Points
OnePlus 2
10985 Points -9%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
20910 Points +74%
Gigaset ME
10927 Points -9%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
9495 Points -21%
HTC One A9
9423 Points -22%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
603 Points
OnePlus 2
1734 Points +188%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
3302 Points +448%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
336 Points -44%
HTC One A9
680 Points +13%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Graphics (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
524 Points
OnePlus 2
1854 Points +254%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
4506 Points +760%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
275 Points -48%
HTC One A9
618 Points +18%
2560x1440 Sling Shot OpenGL ES 3.0 Physics (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
1269 Points
OnePlus 2
1414 Points +11%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
1706 Points +34%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
1479 Points +17%
HTC One A9
1051 Points -17%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
425 Points
OnePlus 2
938 Points +121%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
2419 Points +469%
Gigaset ME
1093 Points +157%
HTC One A9
385 Points -9%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Graphics (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
359 Points
OnePlus 2
846 Points +136%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
2792 Points +678%
Gigaset ME
1027 Points +186%
HTC One A9
326 Points -9%
2560x1440 Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Physics (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
1175 Points
OnePlus 2
1517 Points +29%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
1648 Points +40%
Gigaset ME
1408 Points +20%
HTC One A9
1060 Points -10%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
T-Rex Onscreen (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
27 fps
OnePlus 2
47 fps +74%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
60 fps +122%
Gigaset ME
50 fps +85%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
14 fps -48%
HTC One A9
16 fps -41%
1920x1080 T-Rex Offscreen (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
18 fps
OnePlus 2
48 fps +167%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
91 fps +406%
Gigaset ME
51 fps +183%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
14 fps -22%
HTC One A9
16 fps -11%
GFXBench 3.0
on screen Manhattan Onscreen OGL (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
14 fps
OnePlus 2
23 fps +64%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
43 fps +207%
Gigaset ME
25 fps +79%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
3.8 fps -73%
HTC One A9
6.7 fps -52%
1920x1080 1080p Manhattan Offscreen (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
7.2 fps
OnePlus 2
23 fps +219%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
44 fps +511%
Gigaset ME
24 fps +233%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
3.8 fps -47%
HTC One A9
6.4 fps -11%
GFXBench 3.1
on screen Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
11 fps
OnePlus 2
19 fps +73%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
29 fps +164%
Gigaset ME
18 fps +64%
HTC One A9
4 fps -64%
1920x1080 Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
2.6 fps
OnePlus 2
19 fps +631%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
30 fps +1054%
Gigaset ME
17 fps +554%
HTC One A9
3.8 fps +46%
PCMark for Android - Work performance score (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
3350 Points
OnePlus 2
4282 Points +28%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
6969 Points +108%
Gigaset ME
4544 Points +36%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
4008 Points +20%
HTC One A9
4293 Points +28%

Legend

 
HTC One A9s Mediatek Helio P10 MT6755, ARM Mali-T860 MP2, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
OnePlus 2 Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 MSM8994, Qualcomm Adreno 430, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Lenovo ZUK Z2 Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996, Qualcomm Adreno 530, 64 GB eMMC Flash
 
Gigaset ME Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 MSM8994, Qualcomm Adreno 430, 32 GB eMMC Flash
 
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 Samsung Exynos 7580 Octa, ARM Mali-T720 MP2, 16 GB eMMC Flash
 
HTC One A9 Qualcomm Snapdragon 617 MSM8952, Qualcomm Adreno 405, 16 GB eMMC Flash
Octane V2 - Total Score (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
4395 Points
OnePlus 2
6955 Points +58%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
8436 Points +92%
Gigaset ME
7109 Points +62%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
3611 Points -18%
HTC One A9
3911 Points -11%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
9346 ms *
OnePlus 2
6585 ms * +30%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
3290 ms * +65%
Gigaset ME
7670 ms * +18%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
11887 ms * -27%
HTC One A9
11054 ms * -18%
WebXPRT 2015 - Overall (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
69 Points
OnePlus 2
80 Points +16%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
64 Points -7%
HTC One A9
69 Points 0%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
27.48 Points
OnePlus 2
44.29 Points +61%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
51.7 Points +88%
Gigaset ME
28.48 Points +4%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
22 Points -20%
HTC One A9
24.79 Points -10%

* ... smaller is better

AndroBench 3-5
Sequential Read 256KB (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
210.2 MB/s
OnePlus 2
234.2 MB/s +11%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
239.4 MB/s +14%
Gigaset ME
232 MB/s +10%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
209.4 MB/s 0%
HTC One A9
187.6 MB/s -11%
Sequential Write 256KB (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
68.6 MB/s
OnePlus 2
125.5 MB/s +83%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
46.52 MB/s -32%
Gigaset ME
131 MB/s +91%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
60.4 MB/s -12%
HTC One A9
39.61 MB/s -42%
Random Read 4KB (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
21.3 MB/s
OnePlus 2
21.87 MB/s +3%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
21.27 MB/s 0%
Gigaset ME
22 MB/s +3%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
22.9 MB/s +8%
HTC One A9
10 MB/s -53%
Random Write 4KB (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
34.6 MB/s
OnePlus 2
13.94 MB/s -60%
Lenovo ZUK Z2
5.64 MB/s -84%
Gigaset ME
15 MB/s -57%
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
11.2 MB/s -68%
HTC One A9
3.61 MB/s -90%
Sequential Read 256KB SDCard (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
39.6 MB/s
Sequential Write 256KB SDCard (sort by value)
HTC One A9s
25.6 MB/s
Asphalt 8: Airborne
 SettingsValue
 high29 fps
 very low30 fps
Dead Trigger 2
 SettingsValue
 high58 fps

Emissions

Max. Load
 32.5 °C31.4 °C32.3 °C 
 32.9 °C31.4 °C33.5 °C 
 32.4 °C30.9 °C32.3 °C 
Maximum: 33.5 °C
Average: 32.2 °C
30.5 °C31.4 °C30.9 °C
30.8 °C31.8 °C32.1 °C
30.9 °C31.9 °C32.3 °C
Maximum: 32.3 °C
Average: 31.4 °C
Power Supply (max.)  32.2 °C | Room Temperature 22.2 °C | Voltcraft IR-350
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 32.2 °C / 90 F, compared to the average of 32.7 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 33.5 °C / 92 F, compared to the average of 35 °C / 95 F, ranging from 21.9 to 56 °C for the class Smartphone.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 32.3 °C / 90 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 30.1 °C / 86 F, compared to the device average of 32.7 °C / 91 F.
Heat map rear
Heat map rear
Heat map front
Heat map front
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2027.628.827.62526.626.426.63125.726.325.74027.725.127.75027.924.827.96322.825.422.88024.223.224.210027.123.527.112536.930.936.916035.12035.120041.519.941.525046.921.746.931553.124.253.14005521.25550056.421.156.463057.617.957.680059.32059.3100062.520.462.5125067.918.167.9160068.414.868.4200070.51670.5250072.914.972.9315074.814.474.8400075.213.975.2500072.213.372.2630067.912.867.9800068.812.968.81000058.312.958.31250050.613.250.61600044.912.844.9SPL82.629.282.6N48.71.248.7median 58.3median 17.9median 58.3Delta10.83.710.829.635.529.628.529.528.526.328.226.329.631.529.627.927.427.925.125.725.124.729.424.733.831.333.843.732.143.742.620.442.64620.84647.920.247.950.419.750.451.922.351.960.820.160.866.318.966.367.517.767.567.116.767.166.91766.97014.87072.915.972.965.914.665.971.514.471.574.714.174.774.813.874.873.413.773.472.613.872.662.313.762.355.213.755.255.113.655.183.128.683.154.11.254.1median 65.9median 16.7median 65.910.53.610.5hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseHTC One A9sApple iPhone 7
HTC One A9s audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 18.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.4% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 11.7% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (28.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 70% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 25% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 83% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 13% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Apple iPhone 7 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.9% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 31% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 60% worse
» The best had a delta of 12%, average was 38%, worst was 134%
Compared to all devices tested
» 51% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 41% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Frequency Comparison (Checkboxes select/deselectable!)

Energy Management

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.1 / 0.18 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 1.29 / 2.28 / 2.52 Watt
Load midlight 4.06 / 5.91 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Currently we use the Metrahit Energy, a professional single phase power quality and energy measurement digital multimeter, for our measurements. Find out more about it here. All of our test methods can be found here.
HTC One A9s
2300 mAh
OnePlus 2
 mAh
Lenovo ZUK Z2
3500 mAh
Gigaset ME
3000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
2900 mAh
HTC One A9
 mAh
Power Consumption
13%
-4%
-20%
25%
25%
Idle Minimum *
1.29
0.6
53%
1.31
-2%
0.75
42%
0.96
26%
0.9
30%
Idle Average *
2.28
1.7
25%
2.03
11%
1.7
25%
1.64
28%
1.2
47%
Idle Maximum *
2.52
1.8
29%
2.08
17%
1.84
27%
1.71
32%
1.4
44%
Load Average *
4.06
5.7
-40%
5.45
-34%
7.18
-77%
2.98
27%
3.8
6%
Load Maximum *
5.91
6
-2%
6.75
-14%
12.75
-116%
5.08
14%
5.9
-0%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
25h 43min
WiFi Websurfing
8h 37min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
9h 47min
Load (maximum brightness)
4h 05min
HTC One A9s
2300 mAh
OnePlus 2
 mAh
Lenovo ZUK Z2
3500 mAh
Gigaset ME
3000 mAh
Samsung Galaxy A5 2016
2900 mAh
HTC One A9
 mAh
Battery Runtime
-12%
6%
-45%
46%
-26%
Reader / Idle
1543
1393
-10%
2323
51%
1154
-25%
H.264
587
580
-1%
672
14%
465
-21%
WiFi v1.3
517
356
-31%
546
6%
393
-24%
626
21%
368
-29%
Load
245
229
-7%
83
-66%
483
97%
176
-28%

Pros

+ 工艺复杂的金属背面
+ 屏幕对比度高,颜色精准
+ 优秀的拍摄能力
+ 易于上手
+ 省电模式,快速充电
+ 精确的输入
+ 低温

Cons

- 机身可能在压力下发出吱吱声
- 无线网络偶尔失去连接
- 显示昏暗,分辨率低
- 平庸的扬声器
- 麦克风有点平淡
- 经常性高功耗

Verdict

In review: HTC One A9s. Test model courtesy of HTC Germany.
In review: HTC One A9s. Test model courtesy of HTC Germany.

HTC的One A9s绝对是一个扎实的主流智能手机。 归功于屏幕的高对比度和精确颜色,您应该可以忍受它的低分辨率,当然面板还是太暗。 同样,缺少的802.11ac无线局域网标准,也应该不会对大部分用户造成不便。 性能和存储容量甚至得到了提高--这是不是一个值得欢呼的理由?

是的,实际上,HTC One A9s是一个很好的主流智能手机。但它与许多优秀设备,比如,联想,一加或三星处于同一个细分市场。 因此,HTC One A9的竞争环境非常激励,其中不乏一些提供更多的高端功能对手。 但是,您真的需要双LED闪光灯,激光自动对焦功能或者更高的相机分辨率吗? 只有您自己知道。

HTC One A9s是HTC One A9的成功升级版本,在几乎所有测试项目里,都提供了较后者更为出色的性能。但它并不能从竞争对手中脱颖而出。 虽然它没有真正的亮点,但你却可以得到一个可靠的没有多余功能的设备。

HTC One A9的重大缺点很少:扬声器可以更好,无线局域网信号也可以更好。 相反地,它有好的测试结果,但却没有亮点。 因此,它算得上是一个扎实的主流设备。在日常使用中,它是不显眼却质量可靠的伴侣。

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。 

HTC One A9s - 12/15/2016 v6(old)
Florian Wimmer

Chassis
86%
Keyboard
67 / 75 → 89%
Pointing Device
91%
Connectivity
38 / 60 → 63%
Weight
92%
Battery
91%
Display
86%
Games Performance
20 / 63 → 32%
Application Performance
34 / 70 → 48%
Temperature
93%
Noise
100%
Audio
52 / 91 → 57%
Camera
72%
Average
71%
82%
Smartphone - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebookcheck中文版(NBC中国) > 评测 > HTC One A9s 智能手机简短评测
Florian Wimmer, 2016-12-27 (Update: 2018-05-15)